On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 03:55:31PM -0400, Tim Peters wrote: > [Jason Tishler] > > So, the question is how should we deal with this issue? > > > > 1. Leave the Python code base alone and assume that Cygwin's > > pthread_sigmask() will get fixed. Additionally, assume I > > will patch around this problem until that happens. > > 2. Patch the Python code base so that HAVE_PTHREAD_SIGMASK is > > undefined under Cygwin. > > > > I recommend option #1. Do others agree? > > I don't know. It seems the only effect of HAVE_PTHREAD_SIGMASK is to > decide whether Python uses pthread_sigmask() or sigprocmask(). If the > latter works but the former doesn't, I would have guessed you'd like > to use the latter <wink>. Yup! But, would such a Cygwin specific change be accepted so close to the release date? This is one of the reasons that I recommended option #1. Any other opinions? Thanks, Jason -- PGP/GPG Key: http://www.tishler.net/jason/pubkey.asc or key servers Fingerprint: 7A73 1405 7F2B E669 C19D 8784 1AFD E4CC ECF4 8EF6
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4