On Jul 23 19:07, Jon Turney wrote:
> On 23/07/2019 17:54, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > Hi Ken,
> >
> > On Jul 23 16:12, Ken Brown wrote:
> > > According to POSIX, "The getpgrp() function shall always be successful
> > > and no return value is reserved to indicate an error." Cygwin's
> > > getpgrp() is defined in terms of getpgid(), which is allowed to fail.
> >
> > But it shouldn't fail for the current process. Why should pinfo::init
> > fail for myself if it begins like this?
> >
> > if (myself && n == myself->pid)
> > {
> > procinfo = myself;
> > destroy = 0;
> > return;
> > }
> >
> > I fear this patch would only cover up the problem still persisting
> > under the hood.
>
> I agree.
>
> There is presumably a class of programs which require getpgrp() to return
> the correct value for correct operation, which cannot be 0 (since that
> cannot be a pid).However, did we ever see this problem outside of GDB? Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Cygwin Maintainer
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
