Mail Archives: cygwin/2005/07/01/16:21:37
On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 01:09:21PM -0700, Peter Rehley wrote:
>My tests indicated that the changes are working correctly.
You did try the snapshot, right? I neglected to mention that I had to
make some corresponding changes to the DLL beyond the below changes.
I don't know exactly when I did that. I made the below changes on 6/9
but I made more changes on 6/11. So, any snapshot since that time
would have these changes.
>On Jun 30, 2005, at 8:23 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>We're coming close to a 1.5.18 release. Please try the latest snapshot
>>at http://cygwin.com/snapshots/ and help verify that there are no
>>regresions against 1.5.17.
>>
>>I'm particularly interested in hearing if the changes made (at users's
>>requests) to the default mutex handling in pthread.h are working
>>correctly. Specifically, does this:
>>
>>Index: include/pthread.h
>>===================================================================
>>RCS file: /cvs/uberbaum/winsup/cygwin/include/pthread.h,v
>>retrieving revision 1.21
>>retrieving revision 1.23
>>diff -u -d -1 -r1.21 -r1.23
>>--- include/pthread.h 2 May 2005 03:50:09 -0000 1.21
>>+++ include/pthread.h 11 Jun 2005 04:56:36 -0000 1.23
>>@@ -55,3 +55,3 @@
>> #define PTHREAD_MUTEX_NORMAL 2
>>-#define PTHREAD_MUTEX_DEFAULT PTHREAD_MUTEX_ERRORCHECK
>>+#define PTHREAD_MUTEX_DEFAULT PTHREAD_MUTEX_NORMAL
>> /* this should be too low to ever be a valid address */
>>
>>do what was requested? This simple change required a lot of changes in
>>the cygwin test suite so I'm not entirely convinced that it was a good
>>thing yet.
--
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 -