Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Date:	Sun, 5 May 2002 16:14:02 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Chris Metcalf <metcalf AT incert DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	RE: New snapshot with significant new functionality
In-Reply-To:	<FC169E059D1A0442A04C40F86D9BA7600C5F9D@itdomain003.itdomain.net.au>
Message-ID:	<Pine.LNX.4.44.0205051611330.9796-100000@rd.incert.com>
MIME-Version:	1.0

On Fri, 3 May 2002, Robert Collins wrote:
> Two things: if /proc/registry isn't writable, cating 1 to
> /proc/registry/.writeable won't work - without special case code. I'd
> suggest /proc/sysopts/fs/registry/writeable.
> 
> Two, why not have two options:
> writeable
> nextwrite
> 
> one is persistent (until all cygwin processes end). The other is for a
> single transaction.

The "single transaction" mode seems like it might be race-prone, if two 
processes (or two threads of the same process) are both accessing the 
registry.  Perhaps it would be cleaner to allow a process to open a 
registry file for write, but then require some fd-specific action (e.g. an 
ioctl, or perhaps writing the fd number to a /proc/sysopts file) to enable 
it to *really* work for write.

                Chris Metcalf -- InCert Software -- 1 (617) 621 8080
                metcalf AT incert DOT com -- http://www.incert.com/~metcalf


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -