Re: [PATCH/RFC 3/3] upload-archive: use start_command instead of fork

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 12:27 AM, Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 08, 2011 at 12:25:00AM +0200, Erik Faye-Lund wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 9:15 PM, Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 01:43:09PM +0200, Erik Faye-Lund wrote:
>> >
>> >> The POSIX-function fork is not supported on Windows. Use our
>> >> start_command API instead.
>> >
>> > Is start_command the right solution? From my reading, the fork is
>> > actually because we want to set up a sideband multiplexer. Should we not
>> > just be using start_async() to start a thread, as we do in receive-pack?
>>
>> I considered that, but discarded it because I figured it required me
>> to plug through a file descriptor all the way through the code. But
>> perhaps I was wrong, and dup2 will make that job a lot easier?
>
> Yeah, exactly. The current code is already using dup2 in the same way.
>

It does, but I'm not entirely sure how dup2 works when start_async is
implemented with threads. Won't cause the multiplexer to fail (the
multiplexer and the archive-thread needs different stdouts), because
file descriptors are process-resources, and not thread-resources?

I guess I could dup stdout/stderr before dup2'ing, and have the
multiplexer write to explicitly to the duped fds. It's starting to
sound very confusing to my ears, but perhaps it's the best option
still ;)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]