On 2024-01-19 20:18, Takashi Yano via Cygwin wrote:
> And I tried to observe the pthread_mutex_xxx() call. Then found the
> test case does like:
>
> #include
> int main()
> {
> for (;;) {
> pthread_mutex_t m = PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER;
> pthread_mutex_lock();
>
Thanks for the replies Brian & Corinna, I learned a lot.
On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 1:48 AM Corinna Vinschen
wrote:
> Users in the Administrators group have these privileges in their user
> token. Under UAC, both privileges are removed from the token. In an
> elevated shell, though, both
Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin wrote:
On Jan 22 16:47, Christian Franke via Cygwin wrote:
Busybox does not build OOTB on Cygwin due to the addition of itoa/utoa() to
newlib in 2014:
https://cygwin.com/git/?p=newlib-cygwin.git;a=commit;h=32c96dd
This is because Busybox use local functions with
On Jan 22 16:47, Christian Franke via Cygwin wrote:
> Busybox does not build OOTB on Cygwin due to the addition of itoa/utoa() to
> newlib in 2014:
> https://cygwin.com/git/?p=newlib-cygwin.git;a=commit;h=32c96dd
>
> This is because Busybox use local functions with same name but different
>
On Jan 22 13:41, ASSI via Cygwin wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin writes:
> > However, I don't find this in the standards. pthread_once is neither
> > one of the required cancellation points, nor one of the optional
> > cancellation points.
>
> The initializer can be cancellable per POSIX,
Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin writes:
> However, I don't find this in the standards. pthread_once is neither
> one of the required cancellation points, nor one of the optional
> cancellation points.
The initializer can be cancellable per POSIX, though:
"The pthread_once() function is not a
On Jan 22 20:16, Takashi Yano via Cygwin wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 10:57:48 +0100
> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On Jan 22 10:25, Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin wrote:
> > > On Jan 22 12:30, Takashi Yano via Cygwin wrote:
> > > > PATCH2: (for cygwin)
> > > > Avoid handle leak caused when non-static
On Jan 22 20:06, Takashi Yano via Cygwin wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 10:25:28 +0100
> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On Jan 22 12:30, Takashi Yano via Cygwin wrote:
> > > PATCH2: (for cygwin)
> > > Avoid handle leak caused when non-static pthread_once_t is initialized
> > > with PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT
>
On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 10:57:48 +0100
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Jan 22 10:25, Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin wrote:
> > On Jan 22 12:30, Takashi Yano via Cygwin wrote:
> > > PATCH2: (for cygwin)
> > > Avoid handle leak caused when non-static pthread_once_t is initialized
> > > with PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT
On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 10:25:28 +0100
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Jan 22 12:30, Takashi Yano via Cygwin wrote:
> > PATCH2: (for cygwin)
> > Avoid handle leak caused when non-static pthread_once_t is initialized
> > with PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT
> > diff --git a/winsup/cygwin/thread.cc
On Jan 22 10:25, Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin wrote:
> On Jan 22 12:30, Takashi Yano via Cygwin wrote:
> > PATCH2: (for cygwin)
> > Avoid handle leak caused when non-static pthread_once_t is initialized
> > with PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT
> > diff --git a/winsup/cygwin/thread.cc b/winsup/cygwin/thread.cc
>
On Jan 21 22:18, John Ruckstuhl via Cygwin wrote:
> I am seeing a weird phenomenon, hopefully someone can illuminate and teach.
> Or point me to an archived thread.
>
> I have some folders that Cygwin utils can readily access,
> but W10 utils claim to have no access to.
> It feels as if
> * the
On Jan 22 12:30, Takashi Yano via Cygwin wrote:
> PATCH2: (for cygwin)
> Avoid handle leak caused when non-static pthread_once_t is initialized
> with PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT
> diff --git a/winsup/cygwin/thread.cc b/winsup/cygwin/thread.cc
> index 7bb4f9fc8..127569160 100644
> ---
13 matches
Mail list logo
