Am 28.02.2016 um 18:04 schrieb David Grayson:
>
> This change would require a lot of 64-bit ingw-w64 libraries and
> executables to be recompiled, and possibly require code changes,
> right?  Does the use of 64-bit ints for PIDs actually cause any bugs?
>
> --David
>

Yes, it causes problems in QEMU for Windows because
getpid() does return an int and pid_t is not int for 64 bit
Windows. Of course it is possible to work around that
problem. It's necessary to choose between fixing the
problem at the source (Mingw-w64) which makes
porting of POSIX code easier in the future but which
possibly requires modifications for existing code using
Mingw-w64. Or to keep the wrong type definition
which means we'd need workarounds like the one in
QEMU forever. :-(

See this discussion:

http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2015-09/msg06804.html

In many cases existing libraries would still work with a new
Mingw-w64 using 32 bit pid_t. They would expect a 64 bit pid,
get a 32 bit pid, so the upper 32 bits would be undefined.
This would not harm for most use cases, because typically
that 64 bit pid is casted to a DWORD before using it because
Windows only uses 32 bit pids. Only when the whole 64 bit
pid is used (for example when printing the value) there would
be a difference.

Stefan

PS. If you want, you can add QEMU to the project list
http://mingw-w64.org/doku.php#some_projects_using_mingw-w64



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance
APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month
Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now
Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=272487151&iu=/4140
_______________________________________________
Mingw-w64-public mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public

Reply via email to