From mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Wed Jun 2 11:48:40 2010 Message-ID: <616802.047330083-sendEmail@descaro> From: "Helmut Karlowski" To: "Alan Hourihane" Cc: "helmut.karlowski@ish.de" Subject: Re: [MiNT] patch:MiNT:single-task Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 15:47:31 +0000 X-Mailer: sendEmail-1.55 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----MIME delimiter for sendEmail-514779.551028372" X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 100602-0, 02.06.2010), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Errors-to: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi X-original-sender: helmut.karlowski@ish.de Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-Id: X-List-ID: List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. To properly display this message you need a MIME-Version 1.0 compliant Email program. ------MIME delimiter for sendEmail-514779.551028372 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Alan Hourihane wrote: > > > Could PD have redirected output to file descriptor -1 ? > > > > Is there a way to test this? If it would be redirected then the close > > should be performed. > > A test app could be made - yes. I meant a test inside MiNT - something like f->links > 0 or whatever. PD does not do anything with -1, but the debugged apps may call a Fclose(-1) before they exit for some reason. And these apps are PD for MiNT so it has no kbd after the PD-client has exited. > > > By not closing are we risking losing some data here. > > > > Yes, this could possibly occur. > > Ouch, I don't think that's acceptable. Only the debugged app can suffer from this. And when you use ST-mode you have to know what you do anyway. > > > > Can you give some help on what F/M_DONT_STOP imply ? > > > > From my changelog: > > > > --- > > To control this currently there has to be the bit 16 (0x10000) set in > > p_flags of the relevant binary. > > > > Any client that has bit 17 (0x20000) set, is not stopped except when the > > single-task-app has this bit also set, i.e. when it has 0x3xxxx. > > --- > > Are you saying that sending a signal such as SIGKILL to the > application wouldn't stop it ? Where did I say that? You can kill PD for example using the taskmanager (once the PD-client does AES-calls). But this is at own risk ;) > > The reason to bypass the timeout is that PD disables the timer-interrupt > > (I think) and there would only be one keypress possible. The same > > happens when you boot with GEM=ROM on original hardware (don't know why > > it happens there). I was thinking to extend this for the ROM-desktop to > > have keyboard there too. > > Are you saying you get no key events when using the current code ? Yes. > I think I'll go and grab PD to see what gives. And try to use ROM-desktop too. -Helmut ------MIME delimiter for sendEmail-514779.551028372--