Svante Signell, le Fri 02 Dec 2011 00:12:45 +0100, a écrit : > > These *are* implemented, that's why the difference with SysV IPC and > > semaphores is important :) > > Sorry that I don't get it: Pino said on November 30: > 22:17:19< gnu_srs1> How much work is needed to support fakeroot-sysv? > 22:17:50< pinotree> implement sysv shared memory
He probably meant sysv semaphores & ipc. > >Only in-process semaphores, by libpthread. I.e. sem_init, but not > sem_open. > > Q1) What is the relation between fakeroot-sysv and SysV shared memory? None. > Q2) fakeroot-sysv use IPC and semaphores. IPC is supported, ?? No it's not either. > but only for in-process semaphores are: Complete semaphore support is > needed for fakeroot-sysv to work properly? Yes. > Q3) What is the current status of fakeroot-hurd? Half-working. One of the issues relates with pochu's patch for file exec name. Just try to run fakeroot-hurd and then start ./configure, bash gets $0 wrong. > Would that be a better alternative for the wholee fakeroot issue? I'd say so, but it must be fixed first, since for now ./configure can't work at all for instance. Samuel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
