signals and fhandlers

Christopher Faylor cgf@redhat.com
Fri Mar 30 07:44:00 GMT 2001


On Fri, Mar 30, 2001 at 04:48:23PM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
>Chris's comment on inherited handles was that non-cygwin applications
>don't know what to do _anyway_ with inherited handles. (Chris: maybe I
>got this wrong? ). Anyway the worst case is that the writers will not
>know that the readers have all died and won't return EPIPE. This can
>happen with things are killed via task manager anyway. (That's why
>there's a warning!).

That's the worst case that Egor was mentioning.  If we can develop
a scenario that allows the right thing to happen when a program takes
a non-standard exit then we should pursue this at all costs.  I have
always tried to do this in all of my cygwin development.  I have, so
far, avoided relying on cygwin cleanups for proper operations.

>Also, the pipes will have to be in the cygwin shared memory area, and
>Chris indicated he didn't want any more data in there (I was going to
>try anon pipes, when I posted my question and got that answer)..

I just said that you shouldn't use the existing shared memory areas.  You
can create your own small shared memory areas.

cgf



More information about the Cygwin-developers mailing list