From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [horiguti@meadowy.org: Re: Your Emacs changes] Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2006 00:34:21 +0300 Message-ID: References: Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1151184882 16522 80.91.229.2 (24 Jun 2006 21:34:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 21:34:42 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 24 23:34:40 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FuFm3-0006lp-KT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 24 Jun 2006 23:34:39 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FuFm2-00073X-CR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 24 Jun 2006 17:34:38 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FuFlq-00073R-Vo for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Jun 2006 17:34:27 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FuFlo-00072o-F4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Jun 2006 17:34:25 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FuFlo-00072d-6o for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Jun 2006 17:34:24 -0400 Original-Received: from [192.114.186.20] (helo=nitzan.inter.net.il) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1FuFxI-0005J4-Os; Sat, 24 Jun 2006 17:46:17 -0400 Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-80-230-35-110.inter.net.il [80.230.35.110]) by nitzan.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3-GA) with ESMTP id DVT30104 (AUTH halo1); Sun, 25 Jun 2006 00:34:21 +0300 (IDT) Original-To: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI In-reply-to: (message from Richard Stallman on Fri, 16 Jun 2006 02:01:55 -0400) 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:56149 Archived-At: > Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 22:21:12 +0900 (JST) > To: rms@gnu.org > Subject: Re: Your Emacs changes > From: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI > > Sorry for delay in replying to your message. > > > We can install your Emacs changes now. Would you please send > > me the latest version of them, adapted to the current CVS > > sources, with change log entries? > > Following patches are to make available make-network-process with > :nowait on MS-Windows, for emacs that the revision of > src/ChangeLog is 1.5136. I applied your changes on my machine, but I found some disturbing inaccuracies (described below), so I didn't yet commit the patch to CVS, pending your answers to my questions below. > +int (PASCAL *pfn_getsockopt) (SOCKET s, int level, int optname, > + const char * optval, int *optlen); You declare pfn_getsockopt, but you never initialize it: there's no LOAD_PROC line for it. Should we add a LOAD_PROC for it? > int > +sys_getsockopt (int s, int level, int optname, char *optval, int *optlen) ^^^^^^ This should be "void *", not "char *", as that's what process.c expects. Is it safe to use "void *" with your code? Also, the linker issues the following warning about sys_getsockopt: Warning: resolving _sys_getsockopt@20 by linking to _sys_getsockopt Use --enable-stdcall-fixup to disable these warnings Use --disable-stdcall-fixup to disable these fixups What should we change in the code to avoid this warning? > - --- process.c 1 Jun 2006 14:08:25 -0000 1.483 > +++ process.c 15 Jun 2006 13:08:01 -0000 > @@ -4831,5 +4831,5 @@ > p = XPROCESS (proc); > > - -#ifdef GNU_LINUX > +#ifdef GNU_LINUX || WINDOWS This is a bad #ifdef (the preprocessor simply ignores everything after GNU_LINUX). While it is easy to fix the problem, this makes me wonder whether the sys_getsockopt code was indeed tested by you, as this last problem would ifdef away the call to getsockopt, if indeed this is the code you used on your machine. Finally, please provide a short test case that would demonstrate that the new code is working (something that wasn't working in Emacs on Windows before the patch, but should work after the patch). Thanks in advance.