Re: libdpkg: m_fork and friends

On Mon, 2007-12-10 at 02:39 +0000, Phil Lello wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I've started trying to port dpkg natively to Windows (as opposed to 
> using Cygwin).
> 
> One area that may cause problems is that Windows doesn't have fork 
> functionality, so implementing m_fork() will be challenging.
> 
>  From what I've seen so far, the only time m_fork gets used in the dpkg 
> source is as part of the process of spawning a child to do some work, 
> and writing Win32 child-spawning code should be pretty simple.
> 
> This is all well and good as long as no other packages are using the 
> m_fork (and possibly m_pipe/m_dup2) code. So my questions are:
> 
>     - Are other packages supposed to use m_fork, m_pipe, etc?
>     - If not, do we know of/care about packages that do use it?
>     - If so, would breaking API compatability to allow a Win32 port be a 
> problem.
> 
> Please note that my last question is badly phrased... it would _only_ be 
> the Win32 port that would have a changed API, specifically the functions 
> that can't be (easily) implemented (m_fork, possibly m_pipe/m_dup2) 
> would be #ifdef'd out.

Are you hosting your project somewhere?

--
David Moreno Garza <[email protected]> | http://www.damog.net/
 Por besar tanto culo ya te apesta la boca.