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:	Tue, 13 Jan 2004 12:09:22 -0800 (PST)
From:	"Peter A. Castro" <doctor AT fruitbat DOT org>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Unix pipes implemented successfully
In-Reply-To:	<20040112215706.GA23135@redhat.com>
Message-ID:	<Pine.LNX.4.53.0401131156560.1104@gremlin.fruitbat.org>
References:	<55216 DOT 212 DOT 0 DOT 200 DOT 4 DOT 1073846861 DOT mtc AT mail DOT moldtelecom DOT md> <6 DOT 0 DOT 1 DOT 1 DOT 0 DOT 20040111140418 DOT 037e01f8 AT 127 DOT 0 DOT 0 DOT 1> <55258 DOT 212 DOT 0 DOT 200 DOT 4 DOT 1073851049 DOT mtc AT mail DOT moldtelecom DOT md> <20040111200858 DOT GA18960 AT redhat DOT com> <Pine DOT LNX DOT 4 DOT 53 DOT 0401121311210 DOT 1104 AT gremlin DOT fruitbat DOT org> <20040112215706 DOT GA23135 AT redhat DOT com>
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-IsSubscribed:	yes

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004, Christopher Faylor wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 01:14:00PM -0800, Peter A. Castro wrote:
> >On Sun, 11 Jan 2004, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >>On Sun, Jan 11, 2004 at 09:57:29PM +0200, linamat AT moldtelecom DOT md wrote:
> >>>>Sorry, but no.  The CVS version of cygwin already has a stub of a fifo
> >>>>implementation and the device/fhandler stuff is much different than
> >>>>1.5.5.
> >>>
> >>>But if I change the patch to be compliant with last CVS, should you
> >>>change the answer?
> >>
> >>Sorry but it's unlikely.  As I said, there is already a start of an
> >>implementation for this which I am unlikely to want to throw out.
> >>
> >>I expect to have a working fifo implementation in a couple of releases.
> >>It's the next thing I'll work on after fixing the signal/thread
> >>problems in the current CVS.
> >
> >"in a couple of releases"?  Oh, come on, Chris, have a heart for once.
> >Couldn't you at least look at what he's done?  You've just barely
> >started while he's actually got something working.
>
> Did you look at the cygwin code in CVS?  I used the word "stub" in order

My appologies, but I haven't been using CVS lately.

> to not overstate what is there now just in case someone were to actually
> inspect the source and say "But it doesn't even do X!".  But, I should
> have known that someone would think I'm being mean and step forward to
> call me on it.  So let me apologize for being unclear and restate
> things: there is more than a stub.  The implementation sort of works but
> it was based on an assumption of the way global atoms worked which
> proved to be incorrect.  I intend on changing it to use new signal
> functionality (now in CVS) instead but that needs some development, too.

I think I'm safe in saying we all appreciate the good work you are doing.
I wasn't trying to be mean, really.  Sometimes it's difficult to tell if
your "Just Being Mean"(tm) or if there's something important behind the
works that's driving your comments.  It was my hope that you, in truth,
hadn't progressed very far and that perhaps this other, already
functioning, implementation might either be used directly, or possibly be
an aid to your implementation.  Now that I understand the state of
things, I see it was inappropriate of me to prod you on it.  If you felt
erked by my goading, please accept my appologies.

> In the meantime, I don't even have the time to do a code review on an
> 1891 line patch, much of which would not even apply to the current code
> base, which has undergone a major device/fhandler rewrite.  Perhaps you
> haven't noticed, but cygwin in CVS isn't too healthy right now (my
> fault) and I'm devoting a considerable amount of time to fixing that.
> After that there are other patches in the queue ahead of this one, like
> Pierre Humblet's tty list security mega patch.
>
> And, on top of all of that, the patch is obviously large enough to
> require an assignment so, theoretically, I shouldn't even be spending
> too much time looking at it, since there are license issues.  Not that
> that would stop me in my tracks if it was the only consideration but
> it is a factor.
>
> And, on top of that, there is no way in the world that I am going to let
> another potential destabilizing patch into 1.5.6.  There are already way
> too many changes in 1.5.6.  I'm not going to add more.  1.5.7 would be
> the release after 1.5.6.  1.5.7 is "a couple" of releases after 1.5.5.
>
> This kind of thing is what happens when someone codes away in silence
> for a long time without announcing and checkpointing their intentions.
> It's a fact of life with free software.  I was bitten by it myself
> in the early days of cygwin.  It isn't fun and I don't like being the
> bearer of bad news but it is how it works.

I understand.  Thanks for giving us all a "current state of things"
report, be it good or bad.

> cgf

-- 
Peter A. Castro <doctor AT fruitbat DOT org> or <Peter DOT Castro AT oracle DOT com>
	"Cats are just autistic Dogs" -- Dr. Tony Attwood

--
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 -