Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.0.20010104203336.0274b4b0@pop5.banet.net>
X-Sender: usbanet DOT farley3 AT pop5 DOT banet DOT net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 20:42:11 -0500
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
From: "Peter J. Farley III" <pjfarley AT banet DOT net>
Subject: Re: fcntl
Cc: Martin Str|mberg <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010104113318.14486P-100000@is>
References: <200101040856 DOT JAA08258 AT father DOT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

At 11:33 AM 1/4/01 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
 >On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Martin Str|mberg wrote:
 >
 >> Did we reach consensus on that they are ready to go in?
 >
 >Isn't Jeff still working on some minor issues, or wants others to 
test
 >the code?

If I may ask, who is Jeff?  The only thing I was waiting for was a 
reply to my suggestion about making the fcntl changes depend on Mark 
E.'s getdinfo changes from last year (6/18, IIRC), so that all the 
duplicate flag definitions in the termios directory would be 
eliminated, and maybe one or more persons to test in plain DOS and the 
other non-Win98SE environments (i.e., Win95R1 & R2, Win98, WinNT4).

I am quite comfortable with the changes, but shouldn't they be tested 
more thoroughly?  Or does that only happen when a new release is being 
readied?

---------------------------------------------------------
Peter J. Farley III (pjfarley AT dorsai DOT org OR
                      pjfarley AT banet DOT net)