X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature:	a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to
	:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; q=dns; s=
	default; b=M6KcFSxPdw1kzBFedTfM31k+/NNKJ2i9iCi6jFYKAp03+ioZ2LZ6E
	0S/CQAgMHMYddc9ViOLu17AiAilhgOlAv9OWy0dvSm4WbgRcvPpoKW1kEpHM+8bZ
	WuaBbGZjlR7lq/v1ApPPfpWv4g1MakdjekmYhpeK0mEqkYipEnrqcY=
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to
	:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=default;
	bh=aforK4IRSAbkeSY7+tVzSjhVZgQ=; b=Mi4wdx0xWvqJ6RJ+0W0GdsmZPini
	ZtV/GbPNebCO+5MnRamP1HFcrkWQchyNX74PCe5RHZIL6DfwHMPWgP1+JFZnl+uB
	A0mE2W3UdY+M/+TBYe1KBUCYsapME/8Ci1h8D/JkfXvoBUbWhYxlMrLwmnb/yVLi
	miDS+e8qrxGFCtE=
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/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
Authentication-Results:	sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found:	No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status:	No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.2
X-HELO:	mho-01-ewr.mailhop.org
X-Mail-Handler:	Dyn Standard SMTP by Dyn
X-Report-Abuse-To:	abuse AT dyndns DOT com (see http://www.dyndns.com/services/sendlabs/outbound_abuse.html for abuse reporting information)
X-MHO-User:	U2FsdGVkX1/zponmhZuGBDBWRETYYaPq
Date:	Sat, 26 Oct 2013 21:27:05 -0400
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please AT cygwin DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Rebuilding cygwin1.dll - error: "TRANSACTION_ALL_ACCESS" redefined [-Werror]
Message-ID:	<20131027012705.GA1534@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<52692BAC DOT 5060800 AT mandriva DOT com> <20131024150921 DOT GB24229 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <CABEPuQJrD6e2xy18utjm2WqAoVc6seAKR88ocWhiqot3W54m5g AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <CABEPuQLku+UFmoF2Wb6dUBvUEQw8sbmgG4mv-UiMgdSC=t+0TQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <20131026062530 DOT GA5850 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <20131026094704 DOT GA15394 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<20131026094704.GA15394@calimero.vinschen.de>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)

On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 11:47:04AM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Oct 26 02:25, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 10:14:01AM +0400, Alexey Pavlov wrote:
>> >/usr/include/w32api/winnt.h:3541:20: error: previous definition of
>> >?struct _EXCEPTION_REGISTRATION_RECORD?
>> >     typedef struct _EXCEPTION_REGISTRATION_RECORD {
>> >                    ^
>> >In file included from /work/Cygwin/winsup/cygwin/exception.h:15:0,
>> >                 from /work/Cygwin/winsup/cygwin/cygtls.cc:20:
>> >/work/Cygwin/winsup/cygwin/include/exceptions.h:109:17: error: invalid
>> >type in declaration before ?;? token
>> > } exception_list;
>> >                 ^
>> >/work/Cygwin/winsup/cygwin/../Makefile.common:43: recipe for target
>> >'cygtls.o' failed
>> >make[3]: *** [cygtls.o] Error 1
>> 
>> Feel free to provide patches.  Simple compilation issues do not
>> require copyright assignment.
>
>I applied a patch.  The redefinition of _exception_list to
>_EXCEPTION_REGISTRATION_RECORD for x86_64 was cruft from a very early
>"just build, goddammit" porting stage.  Later on it turned out that
>x86_64 doesn't use frame based exception handling anyway so all the
>code using _exception_list is unused on x86_64 anyway.
>
>I also changed the public header <exceptions.h> so that it only
>applies if !x86_64.
>
>That leads to a question:
>
>Why on earth do we have a *public* header exposing the exception
>handling on a certain CPU?  This isn't a standard header, neither POSIX
>nor Linux nor BSD systems have it.
>
>If there isn't a compelling reason to keep the header, I would opt
>for folding the content into the private Cygwin header exception.h
>and drop the public header entirely.

I think its existence predates me.  I vote to nuke it.

cgf

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

- Raw text -