> -Original Message-
> From: Ben Pfaff [mailto:b...@ovn.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2017 7:46 AM
> To: Alin Serdean
> Cc: d...@openvswitch.org
> Subject: Re: [ovs-dev] [PATCH 03/10] windows: add includes to daemon-
> windows
>
> On Wed, Apr 19, 201
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 03:07:03AM +, Alin Serdean wrote:
> > > -fprintf(filep_pidfile, "%d\n", _getpid());
> > > +fprintf(filep_pidfile, "%d\n", getpid());
> >
> > This seems reasonable to me, except that usual practice would be more like
> > this:
> > fprintf(filep_pidfile, "%ld\
> > -fprintf(filep_pidfile, "%d\n", _getpid());
> > +fprintf(filep_pidfile, "%d\n", getpid());
>
> This seems reasonable to me, except that usual practice would be more like
> this:
> fprintf(filep_pidfile, "%ld\n", (long int) getpid()); because pid_t might
> be
> short or int or long
On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 04:41:40AM +, Alin Serdean wrote:
> Add fatal-signal.h include since it uses: fatal_signal_atexit_handler
> and fatal_signal_add_hook
>
> Use the defined getpid() function and also include since
> it is defined in include/windows/unistd.h .
>
> Signed-off-by: Alin Gab
Why should _getpid() be replaced with the other function?
Thanks,
Sairam
On 2/5/17, 8:41 PM, "ovs-dev-boun...@openvswitch.org on behalf of Alin Serdean"
wrote:
>Add fatal-signal.h include since it uses: fatal_signal_atexit_handler
>and fatal_signal_add_hook
>
>Use the defined getpid() func
