This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

RE: Patch to mutex.c

To: libc-alpha at sources dot redhat dot com
Subject: RE: Patch to mutex.c
From: Neale dot Ferguson at SoftwareAG-USA dot com
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 15:56:43 -0400

Title: RE: Patch to mutex.c

Does this mean the "fix" will be included in the main stream?

-----Original Message-----
On Thu, 21 Sep 2000 Neale.Ferguson@SoftwareAG-USA.com wrote:

> Further to the behavior of RECURSIVE mutexes. The man file does
indicate the
> unpredictable nature of unlocking and non-locked mutex. I noted
several
> exchanges on this list on the subject of man pages versus the
standard.
> According to the standard:

By golly, you are right! The Single UNIX Specification does, in fact,
require
recursive mutexes to have error checking properties. This needs to be
fixed.

Thank you for pointing out this omission.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]