Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: RE: Defining _POSIX_SEMAPHORES for cygwin
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 09:00:31 +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID: <FC169E059D1A0442A04C40F86D9BA76008AB97@itdomain003.itdomain.net.au>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.5762.3
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
From: "Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To: <cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id g2PM1sJ03822



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:cgf AT redhat DOT com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 3:49 AM
> To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
> Subject: Re: Defining _POSIX_SEMAPHORES for cygwin
> 
> 
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 08:31:59AM -0500, Gerald S. Williams wrote:
> >I would like to define _POSIX_SEMAPHORES in sys/features.h
> >for Cygwin. According to POSIX, you define this when you support the 
> >semaphore API.
> >
> >We are now 99% of the way to having Python thread support
> >for Cygwin. I got POSIX semaphore support added to Python's 
> source base 
> >and tested it with Cygwin. Now we just have to indicate that 
> Cygwin has 
> >them.
> >
> >The API is there and appears to work correctly. Is there
> >any issue with making this change?
> 
> If you think it works and Robert concurs, then we should add it.

I've no objection, I haven't really bothered with the 'we have foo'
defines, I was hoping to have the cross process objections done a lot
earlier...

So yes, patches gratefully received. Please have a chat to Jason Tishler
as well though, as he has a recurring problem with threaded pythons,
that have prevented us having such a package for ages, and I've not been
able to fix the bug (well I haven't actually had time to look at it
since January).

Cheers,
Rob