Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-ID: <02c001c0b979$5483a970$0200a8c0@lifelesswks>
From: "Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To: <cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
References: <021801c0b8d8$67a70660$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <12075047372 DOT 20010330102931 AT logos-m DOT ru> <028201c0b8ea$5c6efed0$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <20010330104445 DOT C12718 AT redhat DOT com>
Subject: Re: signals and fhandlers
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 10:27:10 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 Mar 2001 00:21:50.0765 (UTC) FILETIME=[94A85DD0:01C0B978]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Faylor" <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: "egor duda" <cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2001 1:44 AM
Subject: Re: signals and fhandlers


> 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.

Referencing
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/psdk/winbase/prothred_1bg3.htm all
process handles are closed on a TerminateProcess() call. I'll see if I
can build detection of readers around some handle rather than a counter
as I have today. That'll give an accurate count even if the process is
terminated.

> >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.
>

That's what I took it to mean. In fact I am using named objects for my
implementation.

Rob