Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/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
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 15:37:57 -0500
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Missed patch?  (gettimeofday time travels V2)
Message-ID: <20030114203757.GA6145@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <000001c2bb91$824a13a0$0100a8c0 AT asswipe>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <000001c2bb91$824a13a0$0100a8c0@asswipe>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i

On Mon, Jan 13, 2003 at 09:55:15PM -0800, Fish wrote:
> 
>Is there any reason why Philip Aston's 6 Jul 2002 patch to
>gettimeofday et. al. logic to correct for WM_POWERBROADCAST events
>(PBT_APMRESUMESUSPEND, PBT_APMRESUMEAUTOMATIC, PBT_APMRESUMECRITICAL)
>hasn't made it into the sources yet?
>
>http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/2002-05/msg00962.html
>
>Was this perhaps just a simple oversight? Or was there another reason
>for it not being applied?

Perhaps it would be instructive if you read the whole thread.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/