From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: Support open-process and friends on MS-Windows Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 10:09:47 +0200 Message-ID: <87wpksoat0.fsf@gnu.org> References: <834m8i3off.fsf@gnu.org> <877fde958i.fsf@gnu.org> <83wple1zym.fsf@gnu.org> <83ziq9zl8l.fsf@gnu.org> <87eg7lbnpi.fsf@pobox.com> <83y45tzhyn.fsf@gnu.org> <87twghs9ot.fsf@gnu.org> <83r3blz96w.fsf@gnu.org> <87inwn3aq7.fsf@netris.org> <83y45jqt5y.fsf@gnu.org> <8760sk34xc.fsf@netris.org> <87inwk33zs.fsf@gnu.org> <83poqsnkod.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1468225990 7876 80.91.229.3 (11 Jul 2016 08:33:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 08:33:10 +0000 (UTC) Cc: wingo@pobox.com, mhw@netris.org, guile-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jul 11 10:33:05 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1bMWeC-0002GI-Us for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 10:33:01 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:58791 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bMWeB-0003KF-WA for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 04:33:00 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36684) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bMWJ3-0004iI-Hn for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 04:11:12 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bMWHp-0000HU-6p for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 04:11:08 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:42660) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bMWHp-0000Gg-0D; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 04:09:53 -0400 Original-Received: from pluto.bordeaux.inria.fr ([193.50.110.57]:53562 helo=pluto) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1bMWHm-0000cK-0F; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 04:09:50 -0400 X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 24 Messidor an 224 de la =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=A9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0x090B11993D9AEBB5 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3CE4 6455 8A84 FDC6 9DB4 0CFB 090B 1199 3D9A EBB5 X-OS: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu In-Reply-To: <83poqsnkod.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Tue, 05 Jul 2016 18:56:02 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "guile-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:18476 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii skribis: >> From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) >> Cc: Eli Zaretskii , wingo@pobox.com, guile-devel@gnu.org >> Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2016 10:04:23 +0200 >>=20 >> Mark H Weaver skribis: >>=20 >> > Eli Zaretskii writes: >> > >> >>> From: Mark H Weaver >> >>> Cc: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s), wingo@pobox.com, >> >>> guile-devel@gnu.org >> >>> Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2016 19:02:08 -0400 >> >>>=20 >> >>> Eli Zaretskii writes: >> >>> > +# define getuid() (500) /* Local Administrator */ >> >>> > +# define getgid() (513) /* None */ >> >>> > +# define setuid(u) (0) >> >>> > +# define setgid(g) (0) >>=20 >> What about leaving =E2=80=98setuid=E2=80=99 and =E2=80=98setgid=E2=80=99= undefined, as was the case >> until now? > > I fail to see how this would be better. It would mean any program > that calls these will not work on MS-Windows. Why should we expect > developers of those Guile programs to be aware of the issue and solve > it on the Guile Scheme level? And what solution will they possibly be > able to come up with, except not to call these APIs on Windows? Our strategy so far has been to (1) either solve the portability issue via Gnulib, or (2) do not provide the feature that is unavailable (the #ifdef HAVE_ in posix.c et al.) It means that application writers have to be aware of the portability problems, even if it=E2=80=99s all Scheme. That sounds reasonable to me. WDYT? Thanks, Ludo=E2=80=99.