Re: [1/2] server: fix async read on mailslot

[Andrey Turkin]

2008/7/19 Michael Karcher [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Am Freitag, den 18.07.2008, 20:37 +0400 schrieb Andrey Turkin:
  Also, please attach patches with disposition inline, not attachment
  (git can do that) - this make review somehow easier.
 If this is an official wine policy (I do see your point), please update
 http://www.winehq.org/site/sending_patches , it tells to use the
 --attach option in the imap case.

It looks that most of patch authors doesn't follow this guide (from last 16
patches I've seen one with Content-Disposition: Attachment and 15 either
with Content-Disposition: Inline or with inline patches). Anyone, is there
some reason to keep the guide which noone follows?

Re: [1/2] server: fix async read on mailslot

[Michael Karcher]

Am Freitag, den 18.07.2008, 20:37 +0400 schrieb Andrey Turkin:
 Also, please attach patches with disposition inline, not attachment
 (git can do that) - this make review somehow easier.
If this is an official wine policy (I do see your point), please update
http://www.winehq.org/site/sending_patches , it tells to use the
--attach option in the imap case.

Regards,
  Michael Karcher

Re: [1/2] server: fix async read on mailslot

[Andrey Turkin]

Hi Ambroz,

-
FILE_SYNCHRONOUS_IO_NONALERT );
+read_timeout ? 0 : 
FILE_SYNCHRONOUS_IO_NONALERT );
This looks incorrect. You probably want to compare to -1, not zero. Zero 
means reads must not block at all, and -1 means read must wait forever 
(not sure what zero timeout would work as expected with your patch, but 
it didn't anyway and I think it maybe is broken in another place)
Also, please attach patches with disposition inline, not attachment (git 
can do that) - this make review somehow easier.


Regards,
 Andrey


Ambroz Bizjak wrote:

Hi,

Changelog:
server: fix async read on mailslot