This is the mail archive of the cygwin mailing list for the Cygwin project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: higher-level IO very slow with cygwin1.dll 5.10 (due to set_flags?)


On Sat, Jun 26, 2004 at 10:45:51PM +0100, Mark Thornton wrote:
>Pierre A. Humblet wrote:
>
>>On Sat, Jun 26, 2004 at 01:09:40PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> 
>>
>>>On Sat, Jun 26, 2004 at 12:05:54PM -0400, Pierre A. Humblet wrote:
>>>   
>>>
>>>>Beware, I found this:
>>>>2000-05-19  DJ Delorie  <dj@cygnus.com>
>>>>	* libc/include/stdio.h: no getc/putc macros for cygwin; causes
>>>>	compatibility issues with different dll versions
>>>>so you may need to recompile when updating cygwin.
>>>>     
>>>>
>>>Also wouldn't that work around the file locks that were ostensibly put
>>>there for a reason?
>>>   
>>>
>>
>>That crossed my mind. But there is no file lock in the macro, which is
>>used by systems other than cygwin. How do they manage it?
>>I also assume that single threaded programs don't need the lock.
>> 
>Is the lock to ensure that normal POSIX append semantics are obtained
>when two processes are writing to the same file?  Normal win32
>behaviour would tend to overwrite whatever had been written by the
>other process

No.  newlib is supposed to be OS agnostic.  The locks are certainly
for multi-threaded purposes.

Anyone who is interested could always ask in the newlib mailing list.
newlib sourceware org.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]