From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Helmut Eller Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: MS-Windows build broken in Fmake_network_process Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2010 11:09:17 +0100 Message-ID: References: <83634jglab.fsf@gnu.org> <831vf7ge57.fsf@gnu.org> <83y6hfeyzw.fsf@gnu.org> <83vdcig87f.fsf@gnu.org> <83r5n6f8s7.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1269684592 21321 80.91.229.12 (27 Mar 2010 10:09:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2010 10:09:52 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Mar 27 11:09:48 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NvSxf-0003IM-Qq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 27 Mar 2010 11:09:48 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43596 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NvSxe-0003gb-UY for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 27 Mar 2010 06:09:46 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NvSxV-0003e7-KK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 27 Mar 2010 06:09:37 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=34187 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NvSxS-0003ch-Os for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 27 Mar 2010 06:09:35 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NvSxQ-0002VB-Um for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 27 Mar 2010 06:09:34 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:38062) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NvSxQ-0002Ug-OO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 27 Mar 2010 06:09:32 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NvSxO-0003DU-38 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 27 Mar 2010 11:09:30 +0100 Original-Received: from dial-181203.pool.broadband44.net ([212.46.181.203]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 27 Mar 2010 11:09:30 +0100 Original-Received: from eller.helmut by dial-181203.pool.broadband44.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 27 Mar 2010 11:09:30 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 32 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: dial-181203.pool.broadband44.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:XArRl6k4FgwgshpcXqzEN+NGJCM= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:122758 Archived-At: * Eli Zaretskii [2010-03-27 09:50+0100] writes: >> From: Helmut Eller >> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org >> Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 22:14:09 +0100 >> >> If C-g or some other key is pressed during connect this must be >> dealt with in some way. Which the previous code did not do >> correctly. > > Please see my other mail in this thread. I think your view of what > happens on Windows when the user presses C-g is at least incomplete. Yes, right. > I don't argue about this code's correctness or necessity on Posix > systems. I accept your and others' expert knowledge about that. What > I'm saying is that this code is unneeded and possibly inappropriate on > Windows, where most of the system calls and mechanisms involved in > this issue work in an entirely different way under the hood. > Therefore, I submit that this code should have never been installed > unconditionally, at least not without discussing its applicability and > implications on Windows. You seem to think that adding lots of #ifdefs is a good solution; I don't think that. The code in question is not executed unconditionally. It's inside an if(errno==EINTR). If Windows' connect doesn't return EINTR the code is still correct and simpler than adding #ifdefs. Helmut