Message273488
| Author | masamoto |
|---|---|
| Recipients | dellair.jie, erik.bray, loewis, masamoto, r.david.murray, rpetrov, vstinner |
| Date | 2016-08-23.16:49:35 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1471970975.35.0.083940888748.issue21085@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
Hello, I'm writer for past patch. 3.4-issue21085-struct_siginfo.patch removes si_band field from struct_siginfo if the C siginfo_t doesn't have si_band field. This modification raises a incompatibility between platforms having struct_siginfo. Now, I wrote another patch that doesn't change fields of struct_siginfo to avoid its incompatibility. And I built cpython 3.5.2+ on vista cygwin-x86 using this patch. Murray, would you be able to tell me your idea? Many thanks. New patch changes: If platform has the C siginfo_t structure, but it doesn't have si_band field, the struct_siginfo.si_band field is always assigned zero at function return value. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2016-08-23 16:49:35 | masamoto | set | recipients: + masamoto, loewis, vstinner, rpetrov, r.david.murray, erik.bray, dellair.jie |
| 2016-08-23 16:49:35 | masamoto | set | messageid: <1471970975.35.0.083940888748.issue21085@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2016-08-23 16:49:35 | masamoto | link | issue21085 messages |
| 2016-08-23 16:49:35 | masamoto | create | |