X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Original-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net;
	s=badeba3b8450; t=1567019133;
	bh=yF6EJo/Zeur8a9ZM7Uscqk8AbSnui5C+gJ61vpC10e0=;
	h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To;
	b=Q2gY7ZK/q7tVmWqjF5QmEMalSISu24TuQYTPAnURPyK4NX6bFRQSOO4VtWpiO5PfU
	 KF+Q1fJHWgxx0dWyW+YryaKvqhVh23u4c4SFLutdqUFxyv1BoGrS1Vue3aVNnR5eON
	 PIvXsyfw2N0afXUs6Ubqma1bYGTjCbbE5QTyeqxU=
X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c
Message-ID: <5D66D083.7040302@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 21:05:39 +0200
From: "Juan Manuel Guerrero (juan DOT guerrero AT gmx DOT de) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; de; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101206 SUSE/3.1.7 Thunderbird/3.1.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] exec: fix inversions in leak detection logic
References: <964e3268-2f75-ee73-ab5a-b01bf1aadb98 AT yandex DOT ru> <qjb14m$1kqj$1 AT gioia DOT aioe DOT org> <7209026e-1f1b-e590-00a3-4ed1a424cc0d AT yandex DOT ru> <qjfkbp$1o2c$1 AT gioia DOT aioe DOT org> <bd347f78-b176-6992-291c-2e542241efa1 AT yandex DOT ru> <qjgf7r$1b15$1 AT gioia DOT aioe DOT org> <83d0gzlxgq DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <5D618105 DOT 9020108 AT gmx DOT de> <83tva1ddhc DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org>
In-Reply-To: <83tva1ddhc.fsf@gnu.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:Fm+GQFqHVQaLkn+ZuZXb0pQhxHuejmU74+WUpYxUcJ1D4PRqA8Y
 W68jZ/J0QNpPWWS/6NiCcLLFcXtgotaExwiktjWonlpS4ouUFsMsTzb3zcfv4v/N3tOU5tl
 egzXfT60c9r0gtMjQUzZKkdqrez9IAvVM9JgUy4ihPLJa0Q7Du/Ubxwg5IngdNDH6D7kg6r
 Qmc35/DSPDthxX7VcEBlg==
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:/2opnX3Db6s=:y4HBAJcSnZRGvmIW3n5Tbn
 eKurNa7QyHkVIuZFZSR4eF41XJaHVDti0DUSJgEjS2nPOi2vVbH/+T+NG/w60TRAXqPM5h4sN
 Ya6H/LujPuP8jRt0PYoDujU5sSDaadWr0LSIiK2/VeNM1kAkFTl+21z4CL8JuU6pbezB0AW1I
 m2FTTU7pph/WMZXin9GIR4DQzOjOtfx7anCZzby2bZ7ICToTalR33Coe/sSqoeyjHy0DBHoBM
 xjtV4ClGyJi+RwTuTRWovajN1aR/9p90yJigq2YGBgTgQ4xQh32FIEyLoAE9fK+/y4VOE/nBZ
 pjdg/ZEWQGpYaqG9cjUxyZd8u0+THLhMY6PI9cTOdDk4CyCtKvZ7PJAr5Q86WOS6REjJRQgxM
 fc9Ph5iYK04RO5uwIe9tcd3IqjV3qcRm6EB2FXdwZz3/h285WVwC6Dcai+lOtM/ET0MhMdDPR
 qw+z7McfX5vB6USRD4M3NB1GWIAjhIO0rl5GkpGKHNLHbwDAqz9TWnpU/rmxR3aCLVLgelmmj
 c7c6dPKMgxStPhcLh376xndV+DEYdX0WLhDSlJ1o5vlNuKbJfX2sBv3Kl92g25WXroNyX5hoa
 jxj3g4y2WKrujxZUDAB9vv12+iX7QpgWMJ91swmF8ZZ6sgTXcISauFRqc3Ak9BVfh+e6oDu6R
 KReM5jwP1QctUBQ/ozcBa7TTOC+FkwcGHPYs8utXOVC1IfKnjLRXioVY+1OXFEEyh0WFQLOyo
 FbtSGnNEpdjhk9SR/pA1qMGp8CaF3EY3tji1QWo19SWhSj9YsTG7JF70bi4CHKjgaL+SYYpv1
 KIoW6ma7KMaBVcNoxl+aCUffC5aZ5He6Bk76A5knsmRSH1jYQGQnu8gVWI441DaGbBWlie9T7
 1KPOu9VRvz2EXNxTvlUNFUR0LAKVy5qjaWG1WnzBFB/7YZsRquvLkclSAhp0T3vluBmcTIq4V
 7uHq5jHuBlkRxLmQIrSQI3cye6P5aJt6I8f0Bvw3qcO5tZrXoR0L/oAN7EYTVXZfsaTgnuoah
 t0qg5pJVXb4ce3PxtJNr/0rl7H2HbrbIZ6B+6gz8KRivYVZLZu41NTUShUqAoMkyuIcCj2rO3
 UZSiZ4IQQcObC3h96iK7uvj7JW9K7pxopA/ElqX8rMGMOoIrj+C39247dI62KBfLjUf/jwmtW
 hdm8e2nAJMVNKBYioKUJVwV2ZkJYoB7sHCNd+wI80LW+zNMw==
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Am 28.08.2019 08:13, schrieb Eli Zaretskii (eliz AT gnu DOT org) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]:
>> Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2019 20:25:09 +0200
>> From: "Juan Manuel Guerrero (juan DOT guerrero AT gmx DOT de) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]"<djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
>>
>>> That is true, but OTOH there's no special need to refuse the change
>>> up front.  If the change doesn't cause any trouble to the CWSDPMI
>>> based setup on DOS, and helps some other environment do something
>>> useful, why should we refuse to make simple changes?  I see no reason.
>>
>> I agree with this and thus it is time to bring this issue to an end.
>> The proposed changes do not break a CWSDPMI based DJGPP setup on DOS
>> thus I see no reason why the changes should not be accepted.  If I do
>> not get a proof until tomorrow that the patch below breaks something
>> I will commit it.
>
> Charles Sandmann just replied to me in private mail saying he was back
> from vacation and will catch up on this discussion soon.  So if you
> didn't commit these changes already, perhaps wait a bit longer for his
> review.
>
> Thanks.

No, I still have not committed the patch. Let us wait and see what tells Charles about the isuue.

Regards,
Juan M. Guerrero