wait.h

glibc ships a <wait.h> which contains only one line:

#include <sys/wait.h>

I know of at least three packages that #include <wait.h> instead of
<sys/wait.h>.  Could such a header please be added to Cygwin (preferably
to both branches)?

Patch attached; I presume this is trivial enough to not require a
copyright assignment.

Yaakov

Index: ChangeLog
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/winsup/cygwin/ChangeLog,v
retrieving revision 1.4116
diff -u -r1.4116 ChangeLog
--- ChangeLog	23 Apr 2008 11:19:57 -0000	1.4116
+++ ChangeLog	23 Apr 2008 17:48:09 -0000
 <at>  <at>  -1,3 +1,7  <at>  <at> 
+2008-04-23  Yaakov (Cygwin Ports) <yselkowitz <at> users.sourceforge.net>
+
+	* include/wait.h: New file.
+
 2008-04-23  Corinna Vinschen  <corinna <at> vinschen.de>

 	* posix.sgml: Add openat, faccessat, fchmodat, fchownat, fstatat,

Re: wait.h

Yaakov (Cygwin Ports) wrote, On 23.4.2008 21:18:
> glibc ships a <wait.h> which contains only one line:
> 
> #include <sys/wait.h>
> 
> I know of at least three packages that #include <wait.h> instead of
> <sys/wait.h>.  Could such a header please be added to Cygwin (preferably
> to both branches)?
> 
> Patch attached; I presume this is trivial enough to not require a
> copyright assignment.
> 
> 
> Yaakov
I strongly think you should fix the packages and send the patches upstream 
instead.

--
VH

Re: wait.h

Václav Haisman wrote:
| I strongly think you should fix the packages and send the patches
| upstream instead.

I don't disagree that using <wait.h> isn't very portable, but glibc has
it. The point is that we should be trying to be compatible with glibc
when possible.  This patch is a small price to pay to make building
software on Cygwin that much closer to Linux.

Yaakov

Re: wait.h

On Apr 23 14:18, Yaakov (Cygwin Ports) wrote:
> glibc ships a <wait.h> which contains only one line:
>
> #include <sys/wait.h>
>
> I know of at least three packages that #include <wait.h> instead of
> <sys/wait.h>.  Could such a header please be added to Cygwin (preferably
> to both branches)?
>
> Patch attached; I presume this is trivial enough to not require a
> copyright assignment.

Thanks, applied.  I won't apply it to the 1.5 branch, though.  Only
really important bugfixes should go there.  1.5 DLLs are a dying species.

Thanks,
Corinna

--

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

Re: wait.h

Corinna Vinschen wrote:
| Thanks, applied.  I won't apply it to the 1.5 branch, though.  Only
| really important bugfixes should go there.  1.5 DLLs are a dying species.

Thank you.  (I'm a bit confused as to how "endangered" 1.5 is.)

Yaakov

Re: wait.h

On Apr 24 17:44, Yaakov (Cygwin Ports) wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> | Thanks, applied.  I won't apply it to the 1.5 branch, though.  Only
> | really important bugfixes should go there.  1.5 DLLs are a dying species.
>
> Thank you.  (I'm a bit confused as to how "endangered" 1.5 is.)

It's already on the list of endangered species.  If all goes well, it's
the last year of the 1.5 series.

Corinna

--

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat