Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 10:29:49 +0200 From: Corinna Vinschen To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: cygipc (and PostgreSQL) XP problem resolved! Message-ID: <20030510082949.GD19367@cygbert.vinschen.de> Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <20030506174725.GE1652@tishler.net> <3EB84F52.3020608@ece.gatech.edu> <20030507133326.GA1824@tishler.net> <3EB9A54B.8060500@ece.gatech.edu> <20030508135217.GD512@tishler.net> <3EBB22F5.4000801@ece.gatech.edu> <1052541657.1675.5.camel@localhost> <3EBC8ED0.4040906@ece.gatech.edu> <20030510072239.GA19367@cygbert.vinschen.de> <1052554219.1824.14.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1052554219.1824.14.camel@localhost> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i On Sat, May 10, 2003 at 06:10:19PM +1000, Robert Collins wrote: > key_t, as it's used for ipc, is likely to be *problematic* to transition > in a 'fat binary' style. > > You'd need a 32 bit set of key creation routines, and and translation > table to lookup 32bit keys in the list of 64 bit keys .... > > Given that cygipc is *not* in cygwin today, and you'd be adding it, I'd > simply have it 64 bit from the first release uploaded to sources. > > And I'd time that for oh, a day after cygwin 1.5 goes up as a testing > package. (And release cygipc as testing whilst cygwin 1.5 stays in > testing). Is there actually a need to convert key_t to 64 bit? Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Developer mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com Red Hat, Inc. -- 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/