Svante Signell, on Wed 04 Nov 2015 20:03:02 +0100, wrote: > On Wed, 2015-11-04 at 18:57 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > Diego Nieto Cid, on Wed 04 Nov 2015 10:50:35 -0300, wrote: > > > assert (__hurd_local_reply_port == arg || arg == MACH_PORT_NULL) > > > > > > AIUI any other values are bogus given how 'mig_get_reply_port' and > > > 'mig_dealloc_reply_port' are meant to be paired. > > > > That's probably a good thing to do, yes. > > What's wrong with? > mach_port_t port = __hurd_local_reply_port; > assert (port == arg || arg == MACH_PORT_NULL)
Nothing wrong there. Possibly safer, even. > Additionally, any strong reason to not change mig?? Having to deal with the introduced incompatibility. Samuel
