Thank you,
Maurizio
*From:*AOLserver Discussion
[mailto:AOLSERVER@LISTSERV.AOL.COM] *On Behalf Of *Gustaf
Neumann
*Sent:* 06 August 2011 10:28
*To:* AOLSERVER@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
*Subject:* Re: [AOLSERVER] Aolserver Progress - Some few
examples
Maurizio,
Tcl_Finalize() is supposed to work
: AOLserver Discussion [mailto:AOLSERVER@LISTSERV.AOL.COM] On Behalf Of
Gustaf Neumann
Sent: 07 August 2011 15:23
To: AOLSERVER@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] Aolserver Progress - Some few examples
Dear all,
i did some more digging/googling in this issue and i share the opinion
Progress - Some few
examples
Dear all,
i did some more digging/googling in this issue and i share
the opinion that - at least for the time being -
Tcl_Finalize() could be omitted on windows versions
without too much harm. Some background:
The Tcl manpage says:
*Tcl_Finalize
@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] Aolserver Progress - Some few examples All's
well that ends well
On 07.08.11 17:37, Maurizio Martignano wrote:
Dear Gustav,
Thank you.
Alls well that ends well
Im not sure all the changes I suggested are still in the codebase
Maurizio,
Tcl_Finalize() is supposed to work, and if it does now work
something is still broken in the windows version. Omitting
Tcl_Finalize() is removeing the symptom, not the cause. It
is not unlikely that something else will have the same
problem due to this cause.
When Tcl_Finalize()
August 2011 10:28
To: AOLSERVER@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] Aolserver Progress - Some few examples
Maurizio,
Tcl_Finalize() is supposed to work, and if it does now work something is
still broken in the windows version. Omitting Tcl_Finalize() is removeing
the symptom
[mailto:AOLSERVER@LISTSERV.AOL.COM] On Behalf Of
Gustaf Neumann
Sent: 06 August 2011 10:28
To: AOLSERVER@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] Aolserver Progress - Some few examples
Maurizio,
Tcl_Finalize() is supposed to work, and if it does now work something is
still broken in the windows
that function needs to be out.
Thanks a lot,
Maurizio
Thank you,
Maurizio
From: AOLserver Discussion [mailto:AOLSERVER@LISTSERV.AOL.COM] On Behalf Of
Gustaf Neumann
Sent: 06 August 2011 10:28
To: AOLSERVER@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] Aolserver Progress - Some few
: AOLserver Discussion [mailto:AOLSERVER@LISTSERV.AOL.COM] On Behalf Of
Dossy Shiobara
Sent: 06 August 2011 17:39
To: AOLSERVER@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] Aolserver Progress - Some few examples
Could you build AOLserver with debugging symbols and run nsd.exe under a
debugger
in Win32 and I will let you
know..
Thank you very much,
Maurizio
From: AOLserver Discussion [mailto:AOLSERVER@LISTSERV.AOL.COM] On Behalf Of
Dossy Shiobara
Sent: 06 August 2011 17:39
To: AOLSERVER@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] Aolserver Progress - Some few examples
To: AOLSERVER@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] Aolserver Progress - Some few examples
Could you build AOLserver with debugging symbols and run nsd.exe under a
debugger, with Tcl_Finalize *NOT* commented out/removed (i.e., as it
currently is in CVS HEAD) and confirm where
Dear Maurizio and all...
i have updated cvs on sourceforge with most of your patches.
A few points are questionable (see below).
For me, it is still unclear, why 4.5.1 worked for you, but
not the head version not. As far i can see,
all socket usages were int the same way in 4.5.1, the
[mailto:neum...@wu-wien.ac.at]
Sent: 05 August 2011 14:23
To: AOLserver Discussion
Cc: Maurizio Martignano
Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] Aolserver Progress - Some few examples
Dear Maurizio and all...
i have updated cvs on sourceforge with most of your patches. A few points
are questionable (see
Dear Maurizio,
i guess, everything is fine with you with the head version
on sourceforge.
For me, it is still unclear, why 4.5.1 worked for you, but
not the head version not. As far i can see,
all socket usages were int the same way in 4.5.1, the
variable triggers in nsd.h was defined like
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 02:22:44PM +0200, Gustaf Neumann wrote:
For me, it is still unclear, why 4.5.1 worked for you, but
not the head version not. As far i can see,
all socket usages were int the same way in 4.5.1, the
variable triggers in nsd.h was defined like this at least
since
2011 15:52
To: Maurizio Martignano
Cc: 'AOLserver Discussion'
Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] Aolserver Progress - Some few examples
Dear Maurizio,
i guess, everything is fine with you with the head version on sourceforge.
For me, it is still unclear, why 4.5.1 worked for you, but not the head
Dear all,
Id like to provide you with very few examples to explain
what I was talking about:
These problems manifested themselves in the Win64 version
driver.c
void
NsWaitDriversShutdown(Ns_Time *toPtr)
{
Driver *drvPtr = firstDrvPtr;
int status = NS_OK;
On Aug 4, 2011, at 12:24 AM, Maurizio Martignano wrote:
inttrigger[2]; /* Wakeup trigger pipe. */ ß Why is
this an int when it was a SOCKET (any justification)
A Unix pipe is just a pair of file descriptors, and a file descriptor in Unix
is just an integer.
It's probably safer to define this as SOCKET, but windows.h says SOCKET is:
typedef u_int SOCKET;
And:
typedef unsigned intu_int;
Since Windows is LLP64 and most Unix-like systems are LP64, I don't
understand how AOLserver's defining trigger[2] as (int) is the problem
--
@LISTSERV.AOL.COM] On Behalf Of
Don Baccus
Sent: 04 August 2011 14:53
To: AOLSERVER@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] Aolserver Progress - Some few examples
On Aug 4, 2011, at 12:24 AM, Maurizio Martignano wrote:
inttrigger[2]; /* Wakeup trigger pipe. */ ß Why
Progress - Some few examples
It's probably safer to define this as SOCKET, but windows.h says SOCKET is:
typedef u_int SOCKET;
And:
typedef unsigned intu_int;
Since Windows is LLP64 and most Unix-like systems are LP64, I don't
understand how AOLserver's defining trigger[2
On Win64, can you tell me what sizeof(SOCKET) and sizeof(int) are? Try
this simple program:
#include windows.h
#include winsock2.h
int main(int argc, char[] *argv)
{
printf(sizeof(SOCKET) = %d, sizeof(int) = %d\n,
sizeof(SOCKET), sizeof(int));
return 0;
}
I just learned
: [AOLSERVER] Aolserver Progress - Some few examples
On Win64, can you tell me what sizeof(SOCKET) and sizeof(int) are? Try this
simple program:
#include windows.h
#include winsock2.h
int main(int argc, char[] *argv)
{
printf(sizeof(SOCKET) = %d, sizeof(int) = %d\n,
sizeof
On Aug 4, 2011, at 7:20 AM, Maurizio Martignano wrote:
5. I have to disagree with your statement
A Unix pipe is just a pair of file descriptors, and a file descriptor in
Unix is just an integer.
Feel free to disagree with the official Linux documentation then:
@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] Aolserver Progress - Some few examples
On Aug 4, 2011, at 7:20 AM, Maurizio Martignano wrote:
5. I have to disagree with your statement A Unix pipe is just a pair
of file descriptors, and a file descriptor in Unix is just an
integer.
Feel free
On Aug 4, 2011, at 9:55 AM, Maurizio Martignano wrote:
All of this depends on the week type system of C, were types with different
names, supposed to be used for different needs are considered equivalent is
their size is the same. If we had used Ada none of this would have had
happened:
Dossy Shiobara wrote:
It's probably safer to define this as SOCKET, but windows.h says
SOCKET is:
The source comment is misleading, because trigger is set up as a socket
pair, not as a pipe. Not sure why it's this way, but there it is. And
ns_sockpair is already prototyped as
[mailto:AOLSERVER@LISTSERV.AOL.COM] On Behalf Of
Don Baccus
Sent: 04 August 2011 19:25
To: AOLSERVER@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] Aolserver Progress - Some few examples
On Aug 4, 2011, at 9:55 AM, Maurizio Martignano wrote:
All of this depends on the week type system of C, were types
Hi
It's a socket so it can be monitored by select and poll. It should be SOCKET, I
think it was in the past.
On windows lib-c file handles returned by _open aren't the same as sockets.
You can see this in the libc source Microsoft provides. They can't be
monitored with select. The
, but
please let's use SOCKET everywhere
Cheers,
Maurizio
-Original Message-
From: AOLserver Discussion [mailto:AOLSERVER@LISTSERV.AOL.COM] On Behalf Of
Don Baccus
Sent: 04 August 2011 19:25
To: AOLSERVER@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] Aolserver Progress - Some few examples
To: AOLSERVER@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] Aolserver Progress - Some few examples
Hi
It's a socket so it can be monitored by select and poll. It should be SOCKET, I
think it was in the past.
On windows lib-c file handles returned by _open aren't the same as sockets.
You can
[mailto:AOLSERVER@LISTSERV.AOL.COM] On Behalf Of
Rusty Brooks
Sent: 04 August 2011 20:55
To: AOLSERVER@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] Aolserver Progress - Some few examples
Fine, SOCKET should be used everywhere.
But also, you're kind of being a dick. Don't do that.
Rusty
On Aug 4, 2011, at 1
Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] Aolserver Progress - Some few examples
On Aug 4, 2011, at 11:26 AM, Maurizio Martignano wrote:
If you wanted to develop only for Unix why did you use SOCKET in some
occasions and int in some others?
Damnit, that was never the point.
You said that you thought
August 2011 15:51
To: AOLSERVER@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] Aolserver Progress - Some few examples
It's probably safer to define this as SOCKET, but windows.h says SOCKET is:
typedef u_int SOCKET;
And:
typedef unsigned intu_int;
Since Windows is LLP64
From: AOLserver Discussion [mailto:AOLSERVER@LISTSERV.AOL.COM] On Behalf Of
Jim Davidson
Sent: 05 August 2011 00:43
To: AOLSERVER@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] Aolserver Progress - Some few examples
Hi,
I'm looking at the code now -- definitely needs to be SOCKET in nsd.h
35 matches
Mail list logo
