X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 4F06C3857722 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cygwin.com; s=default; t=1681723144; bh=5VEb9le5vtsztYMR7PJRQQc9qnk4ZIkidAJrCDLZgyo=; h=Date:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc: From; b=XD2dixo5ygkWYh1PewIJ3CT3yqzEHOY3CSLKF5bD1OdXTcI5Qc1eataPslI2S9V0G tTz4ERhRI/9BzDQVUeMEIY/s2q5Pj47UhxTl78hw7/K6OV1WU+Uy1uI/N9EYkXyTJb 5wddxyaMfV1n+GXm+9CicJEEv07U6mbom50m5qPc= X-Original-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org A74273858C50 Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2023 11:18:27 +0200 To: Bruno Haible Subject: Re: posix_spawn facility Message-ID: Mail-Followup-To: Bruno Haible , cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <1752276 DOT 7aRn1RRit1 AT nimes> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1752276.7aRn1RRit1@nimes> X-BeenThere: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Cygwin discussions and problem reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Cc: Corinna Vinschen , cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: cygwin-bounces+archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com Sender: "Cygwin" Hi Bruno, On Apr 16 13:46, Bruno Haible via Cygwin wrote: > Hi, > > AFAIU, Cygwin has a working posix_spawn[p] implementation since 2020 > (commit 3fbfcd11fb09d5f47af3043ee47ec5c7d863d872, 2020-08-03, Cygwin 3.1.7). ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > [...] > Would it be possible to change Cygwin's posix_spawnp implementation, > so that both tests succeed? Basically, yes, but... > Disclaimer: I have done my tests with Cygwin 2.9.0; so, if things have ^^^^^^^^^^^^ 2017-09-07 I'm a bit puzzled. You quote that only Cygwin 3.1.7 has the fixed posix_spawn, but then you test this with a version three years older? Sorry, but... wouldn't it at least make sense to test this with a more recent version of Cygwin first? Thanks, Corinna -- Problem reports: https://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: https://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: https://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple