This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
GNU pth + cygwin + fork [Was: Re: fork failure?]
Charles Wilson wrote:
> Ach, the purist in me just wants to get pth working...
Hmm...it appears the right way to do this is NOT to add another special
case in pth: "no, on cygwin THIS is the way you poke around in the
jmp_buf" + extra cygwin TLC in pth_fork(). Instead, cygwin pth should
use the standard posix sigstack/sigaltstack approach.
But that'll have to wait until after cygwin-1.7.1:
> Let me add a new data point: I'll implement sigaltstack after 1.7.1 is
And, of course, cgf's statement above doesn't mean that sigaltstack will
be available the day after 1.7.1 is released, either. I'm sure it will
be devilishly tricky to get right, and will take a lot of time and effort.
In the short-to-medium term, it looks like converting libassuan and
gnupg to use pthreads instead of pth won't be terribly difficult. Once
once sig[alt]stack is available I can modify cygwin-pth to use the
sig[alt]stack "Machine Context Implementation" instead of the current
"sjlj/sjljw32/none" one, and then restore libassuan and gnupg to the pth
status quo ante.
I think that pretty much ends this nightmare thread -- but chalk another
vote up there for "pretty please, cgf, implement sigaltstack soonish".
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple