Mail Archives: cygwin/2004/04/15/00:05:04
I wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Enzo Michelangeli" <em AT em DOT no-ip DOT com>
To: <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Cc: ""Brian Ford"" <ford AT vss DOT fsi DOT com>
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 11:16 AM
Subject: Re: 1.5.9-1: socket() appears NOT to be thread-safe
[...]
> By the way, even in case of no error the socket calls return the same
> value of fd. Is this OK??
Please ignore the two lines above: I forgot to remove them after fixing
the bug that had prompted me to write them in first place :-) The fd are
obviously different, as shown in the sample output.
Enzo
P.S. By the way, Corinna: couldn't I just put my gethostbyname_r() in the
public domain, rather than going through the bureaucratic chore of the
copyright assignment? Also because I feel that implementing it through
mutex-protection of gethostbyname(), as I did, is just a quick hack, as it
unnecessarily blocks other threads that could access the name server in
parallel (with separate network I/O and properly re-entrant code). It may
help other implementors to solve an urgent problem, but I don't think it
should be released as part of the Cygwin code.
--
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 -