Re: libdpkg: m_fork and friends
On Mon, 2007-12-10 at 02:39 +0000, Phil Lello wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've started trying to port dpkg natively to Windows (as opposed to
> using Cygwin).
>
> One area that may cause problems is that Windows doesn't have fork
> functionality, so implementing m_fork() will be challenging.
>
> From what I've seen so far, the only time m_fork gets used in the dpkg
> source is as part of the process of spawning a child to do some work,
> and writing Win32 child-spawning code should be pretty simple.
>
> This is all well and good as long as no other packages are using the
> m_fork (and possibly m_pipe/m_dup2) code. So my questions are:
>
> - Are other packages supposed to use m_fork, m_pipe, etc?
> - If not, do we know of/care about packages that do use it?
> - If so, would breaking API compatability to allow a Win32 port be a
> problem.
>
> Please note that my last question is badly phrased... it would _only_ be
> the Win32 port that would have a changed API, specifically the functions
> that can't be (easily) implemented (m_fork, possibly m_pipe/m_dup2)
> would be #ifdef'd out.
Are you hosting your project somewhere?
--
David Moreno Garza <david@espiral.org.mx> | http://www.damog.net/
Por besar tanto culo ya te apesta la boca.
Reply to: