Subject: Re: ITIMER Implimentation???
From: [email-masked] (Jeremy Allison)

3 Dec 1996 20:27:01 -0800
Sender: [email-masked]
Approved: [email-masked]
Distribution: cygnus
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Original-To: Alessandro Forin <[email-masked]>
Original-cc: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>,
        "'Jeremy Allison'" <[email-masked]>,
        "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 03 Dec 1996 16:54:25 PST."
             <c=US%a=_%p=msft%l=[email-masked]> 
Original-Sender: [email-masked]

Hi Alessandro,

	I know that NT takes signals on a separate thread,
the problem is that UNIX code expects that synchronous I/O
will be interrupted when a signal occurs. Don't tell me it's
bad, that's just the way UNIX code is written, and that's the
way people using Cygwin32 will want it to work :-). Cygwin32
is not currently MT-safe (that's another bunch of code :-).

This is not possible on NT currently without me re-writing
all blocking I/O in Cygwin32 to use asynchronous I/O under
the covers and waiting on the handle and a separate event
which the signal thread sets as 'signalled'. This is a lot
of work, hence my statement.

Cheers,

Jeremy.
[email-masked]

PS. Please don't say things like 'Signals are bad for you.' in that
definitive 'take your medicine' sort of way. I know they can
be a pain - I occasionally use goto's as well - you just have
to know *when* to use them. What I object to is not being given
the choice. It's only a small step from 'Signals are bad for you.'
to 'Resistance is futile, you will be assimilated.' (which
given your email address... :-) :-).
-
For help on using this list, send a message to
"[email-masked]" with one line of text: "help".