Re: time for 1.5.11?

[Corinna Vinschen <vinschen at redhat dot com>]

On Jun 10 15:23, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Jun 2004, Pierre A. Humblet wrote:
> 
> > 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
> 
> Thanks, Pierre, I've looked at them.  They seem much more complex than
> what's needed here, which is simply a way of sharing objects via
> pointers...  Archetypes also seem to go out of their way to avoid an extra
> level of indirection, but since we have it here for free anyway, reference
> counting looks to be easier.
> 	Igor

Any patch in sight?

Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Co-Project Leader          mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com
Red Hat, Inc.