On 2014-07-28 11:21, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > Ping? > > On Jul 18 21:18, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> >> We really should do that to avoid collisions with system accounts, IMHO. >> >> But maybe we should handle it as a border case of a border case, and >> reliably. Rather than using the default fake mechanism, what if >> we use default offsets for the two cases: >> >> Case 1: posix offset is < 0x100000 ==> Enforce posix 0ffset 0xfe80000 >> Case 2: posix offset can't be fetched (this points to a local user >> having no access to this kind of domain information) >> ==> Enforce posix offset 0xfe000000. >> >> This would result in potential collisions in very rare border cases, >> but it would result in reliable mappings throught all processes. >> And, the complexity would be quite small. > > any feedback on this one? Shall I create a snapshot with a matching > patch? I have nothing to add except that i am a great fan of cygwin snapshots in general, and i suppose that if several posix offsets are set to 0, it is a minor problem if all of them get replaced by the same 0xfe80000.
Regards, Denis Excoffier. -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
