From: 宋冬生
---
mingw-w64-libraries/winpthreads/include/pthread.h | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/mingw-w64-libraries/winpthreads/include/pthread.h
b/mingw-w64-libraries/winpthreads/include/pthread.h
index 9b4b3f2..74bab75 100644
--- a/mingw-w64-libraries/winpthreads/include/pt
From: 宋冬生
---
mingw-w64-crt/Makefile.am | 2 +-
mingw-w64-crt/misc/mkstemp.c | 91 ++
mingw-w64-headers/crt/stdlib.h | 1 +
3 files changed, 93 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
create mode 100644 mingw-w64-crt/misc/mkstemp.c
diff --git a/mingw-w64-c
On 06.01.2015 20:03, Roger Pack wrote:
> On 1/5/15, LRN wrote:
>> On 06.01.2015 2:38, Roger Pack wrote:
>>> Hello all.
>>> As a note, it would be nice to have an mkstemp method defined [1]
>>>
>>> I know gnutls should probably work around it, but it would be a nice
>>> convenience as well, I saw t
On 1/5/15, LRN wrote:
> On 06.01.2015 2:38, Roger Pack wrote:
>> Hello all.
>> As a note, it would be nice to have an mkstemp method defined [1]
>>
>> I know gnutls should probably work around it, but it would be a nice
>> convenience as well, I saw these other comments in various projects:
>>
>>
2015-01-06 13:26 GMT+01:00 Jacek Caban :
> On 01/06/15 12:49, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> 2015-01-06 12:22 GMT+01:00 Jacek Caban :
>>> On 01/05/15 21:58, Erik van Pienbroek wrote:
Jacek Caban schreef op ma 05-01-2015 om 14:05 [+0100]:
> On 01/04/15 12:49, Jacek Caban wrote:
>> Maybe I missed s
On 01/06/15 12:49, Kai Tietz wrote:
> 2015-01-06 12:22 GMT+01:00 Jacek Caban :
>> On 01/05/15 21:58, Erik van Pienbroek wrote:
>>> Jacek Caban schreef op ma 05-01-2015 om 14:05 [+0100]:
On 01/04/15 12:49, Jacek Caban wrote:
> Maybe I missed some better options for us. None of above is perf
2015-01-06 12:22 GMT+01:00 Jacek Caban :
> On 01/05/15 21:58, Erik van Pienbroek wrote:
>> Jacek Caban schreef op ma 05-01-2015 om 14:05 [+0100]:
>>> On 01/04/15 12:49, Jacek Caban wrote:
Maybe I missed some better options for us. None of above is perfect and
I'm not sure what we should d
On 01/05/15 21:58, Erik van Pienbroek wrote:
> Jacek Caban schreef op ma 05-01-2015 om 14:05 [+0100]:
>> On 01/04/15 12:49, Jacek Caban wrote:
>>> Maybe I missed some better options for us. None of above is perfect and
>>> I'm not sure what we should do about it. Solution 2. seems the least
>>> p