Re: [1/2] server: fix async read on mailslot

[Andrey Turkin]

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

[1/2] server: fix async read on mailslot

[Michael Karcher]

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

[1/2] server: fix async read on mailslot

[Andrey Turkin]

2008/7/19 Michael Karcher :
> 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?