This is the mail archive of the
cygwin@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
RE: SysV Ipc shm revisited...A new solution
- From: "Robert Collins" <robert dot collins at syncretize dot net>
- To: "'Ralf Habacker'" <Ralf dot Habacker at freenet dot de>,"'Nicholas Wourms'" <nwourms at yahoo dot com>,<cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- Cc: <cwilson at ece dot gatech dot edu>
- Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 08:29:24 +1000
- Subject: RE: SysV Ipc shm revisited...A new solution
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ralf Habacker [mailto:Ralf.Habacker@freenet.de]
> Sent: Saturday, 8 June 2002 5:19 AM
> To: Robert Collins; 'Nicholas Wourms'; cygwin@cygwin.com
> Cc: cwilson@ece.gatech.edu
> Subject: RE: SysV Ipc shm revisited...A new solution
>
>
> >Robert Collins wrote:
>
> > Already provided. What will happen when the 64 bit key is
> exported is
> > that fresh cygipc linked programs will fail, but existing
> programs will
> > still work correctly. If something like ipcdaemon2.exe exists - OR -
> > cygipc is re-released as a 64-bit version, then new links
> will succeed
> > (but at the possible cost of breaking old binaries).
> >
> Why must this be ? Could not the released 64-bit version only
> use the most
> significant long word of key_t, so that it is compatible to
> the old binaries and
> can use the 64 bit key_t definition ?
It wouldn't be compatible with the old binaries because the signature
would still be wrong, and this would lead to immediate crashes when it
tried to pop to much off the stack.
Rob
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/