I changed my email configuration in December and that resulted in some
sourceware.org mailing lists not thinking I was subscribed. So some of
my timely responses to messages here are showing up here in an untimely
manner.
I noticed this when Corinna made the same observation that I thought I
had
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 11:01:21PM -, James Johnston wrote:
>Hi,
>
>As I have recently mentioned on the main Cygwin mailing list, Cygwin by
>default creates FILE_FLAG_OVERLAPPED named pipes for the standard file
>handles (stdin/stdout/stderr). These overlapped pipes require all programs
>using
On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 12:40:20AM +, Ray Donnelly wrote:
>- PWCHAR p;
>+ PWCHAR p = NULL;
AFAICT, that would result in a NULL dereference. I've checked in
a different change to handle this.
cgf
On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Dec 22 01:03, Ray Donnelly wrote:
>> I hope this is OK and I've done it in the best place. Please advise if
>> it needs any changes.
>
> I have no idea if this is ok. This is a patch to a very crucial
> function in terms of path handling
Hi,
Could someone please look over these and give me some feedback?
http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-patches/2013-q4/msg00017.html
http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-patches/2013-q4/msg00018.html
http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-patches/2013-q4/msg00019.html
Cheers,
Ray.
On Dec 22 01:03, Ray Donnelly wrote:
> I hope this is OK and I've done it in the best place. Please advise if
> it needs any changes.
I have no idea if this is ok. This is a patch to a very crucial
function in terms of path handling, and it's not clear that this isn't
doing the wrong thing. What
On Dec 22 00:40, Ray Donnelly wrote:
> [PATCH 2/3] * winsup/cygwin/strace.cc (strace::vsprntf): Fix potentially
> uninitialized variable p
p is never uninitialized in this code.
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer
On Dec 22 00:39, Ray Donnelly wrote:
> I hope patches generated with git are OK?
In theory, yes, but please attach them inline to the mail, otherwise
they won't show up in the reply with some mailers, so it's a hassle
to discuss them.
As for this patch, did you actually test it?
- len = sp
On Dec 30 21:35, Mark Geisert wrote:
> Hope I'm doing this correctly. Here is the ChangeLog entry followed
> by the patch. I wasn't sure if patch originator or patch committer,
> if different, gets their name in the ChangeLog entry. Patch
> rationale available on request.
> Cheers,
>
> ..mark
>
