Re: [1/2] server: fix async read on mailslot
Hi Ambroz,
- FILE_SYNCHRONOUS_IO_NONALERT ); + read_timeout ? 0 : FILE_SYNCHRONOUS_IO_NONALERT ); This looks incorrect. You probably want to compare to -1, not zero. Zero means reads must not block at all, and -1 means read must wait forever (not sure what zero timeout would work as expected with your patch, but it didn't anyway and I think it maybe is broken in another place) Also, please attach patches with disposition inline, not attachment (git can do that) - this make review somehow easier.
Regards, Andrey Ambroz Bizjak wrote:
Hi,
Changelog: server: fix async read on mailslot ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Am Freitag, den 18.07.2008, 20:37 +0400 schrieb Andrey Turkin:
Also, please attach patches with disposition inline, not attachment (git can do that) - this make review somehow easier. If this is an official wine policy (I do see your point), please update http://www.winehq.org/site/sending_patches , it tells to use the --attach option in the imap case.
Regards, Michael Karcher
2008/7/19 Michael Karcher <wine(a)mkarcher.dialup.fu-berlin.de>:
Am Freitag, den 18.07.2008, 20:37 +0400 schrieb Andrey Turkin:
Also, please attach patches with disposition inline, not attachment (git can do that) - this make review somehow easier. If this is an official wine policy (I do see your point), please update http://www.winehq.org/site/sending_patches , it tells to use the --attach option in the imap case.
It looks that most of patch authors doesn't follow this guide (from last 16 patches I've seen one with Content-Disposition: Attachment and 15 either with Content-Disposition: Inline or with inline patches). Anyone, is there some reason to keep the guide which noone follows?
participants (2)
-
Andrey Turkin -
Michael Karcher