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
Message-ID:	<3EBB22F5.4000801@ece.gatech.edu>
Date:	Thu, 08 May 2003 23:39:33 -0400
From:	Charles Wilson <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4a) Gecko/20030401
X-Accept-Language:	en-us, en
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	Jason Tishler <jason AT tishler DOT net>
CC:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: cygipc (and PostgreSQL) XP problem resolved!
References:	<20030506174725 DOT GE1652 AT tishler DOT net> <3EB84F52 DOT 3020608 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <20030507133326 DOT GA1824 AT tishler DOT net> <3EB9A54B DOT 8060500 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <20030508135217 DOT GD512 AT tishler DOT net>
In-Reply-To:	<20030508135217.GD512@tishler.net>

Jason Tishler wrote:

> Chuck,
> 
> On Wed, May 07, 2003 at 08:31:07PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
> 
>>I think this needs to be a runtime function, not a compiletime macro.
> 
> 
> Given Igor's validation, improvements, and corrections of/to my patch,
> do you still want a runtime function approach?  Or, is the (ugly and
> possibly performance affecting) macro approach OK?

Nope -- I'm an idiot.  You and Igor are correct.  But I'm more concerned 
about the other issues I raised, to which nobody has yet responded 
(although I'm still working thru the mail).  To whit: 64 bit key_t and 
coordination with cygwin dll/newlib.

--Chuck



--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -