Re: time for 1.5.11?

["Pierre A. Humblet" <pierre dot humblet at ieee dot org>]

Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>
> 
> Ok, it turns out that to fix this properly, we'll need a much larger patch
> than the one line I was looking at...  Here are some thoughts.
> 
> First off, my guess above was wrong.  The IO handle has nothing to do with
> this -- fhandler_dev_dsp doesn't use it.  However, the intuition (I still
> think) was correct: some fields, namely the audio_in_ and audio_out_
> pointers, weren't replicated on dup(), so the new (duped) object ended up
> with NULL fields, and couldn't write to them.
> 
> The simplest solution to the above is to simply copy the pointers.  This
> will work for the test program I provided earlier, but won't for another
> legitimate test program (attached) that closes the original handle before
> using the duped one (I think this behavior is allowed).
> 
> The "proper" way to fix this, IMO, would be to allow sharing the audio_in_
> and audio_out_ objects, and have some sort of reference count in them,
> instead of deleting them outright in close().  

FWIW, this reminds me of the archetype concept that cgf has built into cygwin.
It's currently used for ttys.

Pierre