From mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Sat Oct 29 22:43:52 2005 X-Original-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de Delivered-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de Subject: Re: [MiNT] pexit, pwaitpid and return values From: Odd Skancke To: MiNT List In-Reply-To: References: <1130541303.5390.19.camel@linuxbox> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 22:40:12 +0000 Message-Id: <1130625612.5390.27.camel@linuxbox> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.4 (2.0.4-6) X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Errors-To: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi X-original-sender: ozk@atari.org Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-Id: X-List-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at relay.boerde.de X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on relay.boerde.de X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.1 tagged_above=-50.5 required=7.0 tests=AWL, BAYES_00, RCVD_IN_SORBS X-Spam-Level: ** Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by wh58-902.st.uni-magdeburg.de id j9TKhqfB009672 lør, 29,.10.2005 kl. 21.49 +0200, skrev Frank Naumann: > Hello! > > > (), only 8 bits of this return value was returned via pexec(0). This > > problem I have attempted to fix, so hopefully this is OK. Now for the > > Be careful if you manipulate Pexec(), Pwaitpid() and friends, there are > important cross dependencies in MiNTLib :-/ It's easy to break something. Yes, I know. I renamed existing sys_pwaitpid() to just pwaitpid(), and had it take a pointer to a short into which the unmodified exit code should be written. Then I had the original sys_pwaitpid() call this. Should be OK, I think. You didnt comment on what you think about the existing dilemma we have here, regarding Pexec() vs. pwait() and friends return codes? There is inconsistency here now! Best Regards, Odd Skancke