[Bug 14789] New: Fix signal handler
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 Summary: Fix signal handler Product: Wine Version: CVS/GIT Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: -unknown AssignedTo: wine-bugs(a)winehq.org ReportedBy: Markus.Elfring(a)web.de The function "fprintf()" does not belong to the list of async-signal-safe functions. See section "2.4.3 Signal Actions" from the document "2.4 Signal Concepts". http://opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/xsh_chap02_04.html#tag_0... I guess that a different program design will be needed for your function "do_sigsegv". I recommend to change the data type for the variable "watchdog" to "sig_atomic_t". http://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git?a=blob;f=server/signal.c;h=5e4fe33c6a3... -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 Vitaliy Margolen <vitaliy(a)kievinfo.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution| |WONTFIX --- Comment #1 from Vitaliy Margolen <vitaliy(a)kievinfo.com> 2008-08-07 12:10:48 --- The fprintf there used on an error paths and for debug only. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring(a)web.de> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |UNCONFIRMED Resolution|WONTFIX | --- Comment #2 from Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring(a)web.de> 2008-08-07 12:53:36 --- This debug output is implemented by the wrong function. Would you like to achieve complete async-signal-safety? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reentrant -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 Vitaliy Margolen <vitaliy(a)kievinfo.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution| |WONTFIX --- Comment #3 from Vitaliy Margolen <vitaliy(a)kievinfo.com> 2008-08-07 15:17:46 --- Huh? There is nothing to be fixed here. Closing. Unless you have a patch to send, don't bother reopening. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 Vitaliy Margolen <vitaliy(a)kievinfo.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |CLOSED --- Comment #4 from Vitaliy Margolen <vitaliy(a)kievinfo.com> 2008-08-07 15:31:21 --- First of all wineserver is a single threaded app. So while it processing signals nothing else works. Second - that is a pure debug function that is not even used by default - one have to recompile wineserver with #define DEBUG_OBJECTS 1. And then send -HUP to the server. Third it's called from the signal handler which guarantees it won't ever reenter. So I don't see what reentrancy are you talking about here? Closing - there is nothing to fix. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 Chris <chris.kcat(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |chris.kcat(a)gmail.com --- Comment #5 from Chris <chris.kcat(a)gmail.com> 2008-08-07 23:15:23 ---
Second - that is a pure debug function that is not even used by default - one have to recompile wineserver with #define DEBUG_OBJECTS 1. And then send -HUP to the server.
Just because it's only used in the debug path doesn't make it's use any less invalid. If anything it'll make debugging harder as this can trip and hide the real problem being tracked.
Third it's called from the signal handler which guarantees it won't ever reenter.
So I don't see what reentrancy are you talking about here?
Reentrancy is when a function is called while another context/frame is also inside the function. This can very much happen in a single-threaded app. Take for example: 1> User code runs 2> User code enters fprintf 3> Signal interrupt (user code is paused inside fprintf) 4> Signal handler enters fprintf (!!both user code and signal handler are inside fprintf!!) 5> Signal handler leaves fprintf 6> Signal handler exits and resumes user code 7> User code continues inside fprintf 8> User code leaves fprintf IMO, this is a valid bug. You should not be using fprintf inside a signal handler because it's not gauranteed to handle this situation. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring(a)web.de> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |UNCONFIRMED Resolution|WONTFIX | --- Comment #6 from Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring(a)web.de> 2008-08-08 02:04:45 --- A printf() function call might result in a deadlock during signal handling. Would you like to use the function "write()" instead? http://opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/write.html Are you going to integrate the following update suggestion for improved source code portability? diff --git a/server/signal.c b/server/signal.c index 5e4fe33..dfdfa9b 100644 --- a/server/signal.c +++ b/server/signal.c @@ -99,7 +99,7 @@ static struct handler *handler_sigint; static struct handler *handler_sigchld; static struct handler *handler_sigio; -static int watchdog; +static sig_atomic_t watchdog; /* create a signal handler */ static struct handler *create_handler( signal_callback callback ) -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |patch, source -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #7 from Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring(a)web.de> 2008-08-10 07:48:11 --- Created an attachment (id=15367) --> (http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=15367) Update suggestion to make more functions async-signal-safe -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #8 from Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring(a)web.de> 2008-08-19 08:10:35 --- Created an attachment (id=15485) --> (http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=15485) Update suggestion for async-signal-safe program termination A few more places are affected. http://opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/_Exit.html -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution| |WONTFIX --- Comment #9 from Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> 2008-08-20 06:06:14 --- These are totally non-issues, your changes wouldn't make the slightest difference, all they would do is break things on non-compliant platforms. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 Dmitry Timoshkov <dmitry(a)codeweavers.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |CLOSED --- Comment #10 from Dmitry Timoshkov <dmitry(a)codeweavers.com> 2008-08-20 06:36:03 --- Closing. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #11 from Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring(a)web.de> 2008-08-20 12:39:57 --- I would like to point out that the implementation for the function "segvhandler" is also not async-signal-safe. I'd prefer more respect for software correctness in this detail. http://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git?a=blob;f=tools/wmc/wmc.c;h=910a654b3c8... http://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git/?a=blob;f=tools/wrc/wrc.c;h=15f30a3e7d... I know that it means a couple of more work to get the affected parts completely right. Which behaviour do you expect on standard-compliant platforms if unsafe function calls are used? -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #12 from Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> 2008-08-21 07:38:40 --- There is no reason at all to worry about that fprintf, first because segv is actually not an async signal, second because the code aborts right away so we never even return from the handler, third because if the app is really crashing inside fprintf not seeing the final error is the least of your worries. There are more important issues to worry about than the theoretical standard compliance of a signal handler that never gets triggered anyway. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #13 from Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring(a)web.de> 2008-08-21 08:01:02 --- I agree that there are other issues with higher importance. Nevertheless, I would appreciate implementations for signal handlers that are always asynchronous signal safe. The current approaches are not guaranteed to work because they depend on potentially undefined behaviour. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #14 from Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> 2008-08-21 08:14:38 --- While this may be true in theory, it's completely irrelevant in practice, and I'm not going to make the code uglier or less portable to solve such a non-problem. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #15 from Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring(a)web.de> 2008-08-21 08:33:35 --- It seems to be convenient to ignore consequences by correct programming for async-signal-safety. The source code portability will be improved if this particular technical issue will be fixed. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 Dan Kegel <dank(a)kegel.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Version|CVS/GIT |unspecified -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #16 from Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring(a)web.de> 2009-03-24 05:12:02 --- My bug report was another example for the issue "CWE-387: Signal Errors". http://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/387.html -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #17 from Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring(a)web.de> 2009-11-26 04:33:21 --- Do you agree to the descriptions by Justin Pincar? https://www.securecoding.cert.org/confluence/display/seccode/SIG30-C.+Call+o... -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 Dmitry Timoshkov <dmitry(a)codeweavers.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords|patch | Platform|All |Other OS/Version|All |other --- Comment #18 from Dmitry Timoshkov <dmitry(a)codeweavers.com> 2009-11-26 04:49:11 --- There is nothing to agree or not, because there is nothing to discuss in this bug report, since there is no any bug. Please re-read all the answers to your comments, referencing somebody's else comments out of the air won't make your point of view more valueable. Again, there is *nothing* to fix. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #19 from Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring(a)web.de> 2009-11-26 05:24:37 --- (In reply to comment #18) I propose to fix a specific implementation detail. I find it strange that you do not admit open issues here. http://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git/?a=blob;f=server/signal.c;hb=6d1605a6a... http://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git/?a=blob;f=tools/wmc/wmc.c;hb=1c994d497... http://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git/?a=blob;f=tools/wrc/wrc.c;h=828176cb74... I would prefer not to push the topic away just because other issues might be more challenging. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #20 from Dmitry Timoshkov <dmitry(a)codeweavers.com> 2009-11-26 05:28:53 --- (In reply to comment #19)
(In reply to comment #18) I propose to fix a specific implementation detail.
Once again: there is nothing to fix. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #21 from Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring(a)web.de> 2009-11-26 05:45:44 --- (In reply to comment #20) Why do you really want to ignore such a programming error? -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #22 from Dmitry Timoshkov <dmitry(a)codeweavers.com> 2009-11-26 11:00:53 --- (In reply to comment #21)
Why do you really want to ignore such a programming error?
Repeat after me: there is no error or a bug in the Wine code you are referring to. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #23 from Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring(a)web.de> 2009-11-26 12:40:09 --- (In reply to comment #22) Would you like to understand that it is a clear programming error in the referred source code places to call a function like "fprintf" (that is not async-signal-safe) from within signal handler implementations? -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 Dan Kegel <dank(a)kegel.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |dank(a)kegel.com --- Comment #24 from Dan Kegel <dank(a)kegel.com> 2009-11-26 20:29:33 --- Markus, I'm all for safe code, but pick your battles! As Alexandre said, this code only fires when the server is crashing, which should never happen. Could you spend some of your energy helping me triage buffer overruns (see http://kegel.com/wine/valgrind/logs/ )? -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #25 from Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring(a)web.de> 2009-11-27 05:30:06 --- (In reply to comment #24)
Markus, I'm all for safe code, but pick your battles!
It would be easy to use the data type "sig_atomic_t" and to delete the misplaced fprintf() calls ...
As Alexandre said, this code only fires when the server is crashing, which should never happen.
The source code has got more open issues like "Check return codes everywhere" that result in different opinions about the involved probabilities. http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14788
Could you spend some of your energy helping me triage buffer overruns (see http://kegel.com/wine/valgrind/logs/ )?
I assume that some of them can be cleaned up by more object-oriented programming (in C++). -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #26 from Dan Kegel <dank(a)kegel.com> 2009-11-27 08:37:23 --- Telling a project that it needs to switch the language it's written in is generally not a good idea. *plonk* -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #27 from Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring(a)web.de> 2009-11-27 09:08:36 --- (In reply to comment #26) The C programming language makes it inherently easy to "overlook" specific implementation details (see also bug #14788). So we try to point out open issues from code reviews by dynamic or static analysis. The willingness for cooperation of fix integration varies. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #28 from Dan Kegel <dank(a)kegel.com> 2009-11-27 09:27:59 --- Dude, if you hadn't noticed, we're already paying more attention to coverity and purify than a lot of projects, and we did it before you told us how to do our job. Now please get lost. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #29 from Dmitry Timoshkov <dmitry(a)codeweavers.com> 2009-11-27 11:00:12 --- (In reply to comment #27)
The C programming language makes it inherently easy to "overlook" specific implementation details (see also bug #14788). So we try to point out open issues from code reviews by dynamic or static analysis. The willingness for cooperation of fix integration varies.
Usually suggestions like above show complete ignorance of the subject. If you believe that you can't write a trustworthy code - go ahead and find some other speciality, there are lots of them. Have you already tried that suggestion in the lkml? -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #30 from Dan Kegel <dank(a)kegel.com> 2009-11-27 15:29:00 --- See also http://www.archivum.info/comp.lang.c/2005-07/01975/Re:_const-incorrect_pract... for another example where somebody concluded he was a troll. Markus, patches that solve real problems are welcome, but telling us how to do our job isn't. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #31 from Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring(a)web.de> 2009-11-27 16:06:08 --- (In reply to comment #30) Would you like to consider the attachment #15367 as an acceptable patch? -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #32 from Dan Kegel <dank(a)kegel.com> 2009-11-27 16:26:39 --- Go ahead and submit it to wine-patches, see if Alexandre will accept it. He's pretty picky, even extremely useful patches often get rejected for various reasons. I'd suggest making the string const local. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #33 from Dmitry Timoshkov <dmitry(a)codeweavers.com> 2009-11-27 22:34:26 --- (In reply to comment #31)
(In reply to comment #30) Would you like to consider the attachment #15367 [details] as an acceptable patch?
It's been explained to you in the comment #12 already, sig_atomic_t buys you nothing either. For some reason you are stubbornly refusing to accept that all your rant in this bug completely useless, and actually about nothing. You are losing your time and ours, please try to find some other activity. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #34 from Dmitry Timoshkov <dmitry(a)codeweavers.com> 2009-11-28 00:56:25 ---
- fprintf( stderr, "wineserver crashed, please enable coredumps (ulimit -c unlimited) and restart.\n"); + (void) write(STDERR_FILENO, crash_message, sizeof(crash_message) - 1);
And btw, you are breaking your own requirements stated in the bug 14788 you are referencing here :-) Is there any reason why you don't follow your own coding standard rules? That's a not safe programming practice, right? <grin> -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #35 from Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring(a)web.de> 2009-11-28 07:58:33 --- (In reply to comment #32)
Go ahead and submit it to wine-patches, see if Alexandre will accept it.
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2009-November/081859.html http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.wine.patches/75194
He's pretty picky, even extremely useful patches often get rejected for various reasons.
Thanks for your background information. I am curious if dissension can be resolved. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #36 from Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring(a)web.de> 2009-11-28 08:02:47 --- (In reply to comment #33)
It's been explained to you in the comment #12 already, sig_atomic_t buys you nothing either.
The use of this data type improves the portability for setting of flags in signal handlers. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #37 from Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring(a)web.de> 2009-11-28 08:10:38 --- (In reply to comment #34)
And btw, you are breaking your own requirements stated in the bug 14788 you are referencing here :-) Is there any reason why you don't follow your own coding standard rules?
I do not see the need in this special case because I intentionally marked the ignorance of the return value by the cast. Would you like to continue the discussion of such software design details in the mentioned bug report? -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #38 from Vitaliy Margolen <vitaliy(a)kievinfo.com> 2009-11-28 10:41:52 --- Marcus, if you send patches, stick to the standards of _this_ project. DO NOT invent your own standards. If you want to do that - go start your own. You've been told do not add any bogus "(void)" anywhere, DO NOT use any arbitrary types. If you can not comprehend this requirements, please stay away from this project! Dan, please remove his user from bugzilla, we don't need trolls here. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14789 --- Comment #39 from Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring(a)web.de> 2009-11-28 10:55:33 --- (In reply to comment #38)
DO NOT invent your own standards.
I have not got the impression that I do that. I am trying to reuse specifications from POSIX and recent C as much as possible.
You've been told do not add any bogus "(void)" anywhere, DO NOT use any arbitrary types. If you can not comprehend this requirements, please stay away from this project!
I am very surprised by your very strong reaction.
Dan, please remove his user from bugzilla, we don't need trolls here.
I find it strange that I get classified as a troll because it seems that there is still too many disagreement on technical details around so far. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
participants (1)
-
wine-bugs＠winehq.org