Re: Support for QNX6, POSIX IPC and PTHREAD-style locking

> Bruce said he'd accept patch without Posix semaphores. And I asked to vote
> 3-way (whole patch, qnx6-support-only or none). What you're saying appears
> to be 'none' but you're not making it clear if that's 'no to whole patch',
> 'no to posix semaphores', 'no to qnx6-support-only patch' or 'no to
> anything'.
>
> My understanding at this point is, there should not be problem with applying
> QNX6-support-only patch, as long as it works within existing framework and
> does not introduce non-proven code anywhere. That's what new version of
> patch is.

I will vote for the QNX-only version. However, I will not apply any
patch unless there is agreement from the group.

It is up the group to decide the issue.

However,even though I will vote for the QNX-only version, I am doing
this only because you feel so strongly something should be in 7.2. My
personal opinion is that this entire patch should wait for 7.3. It is
very late in 7.2 development and even a reviewed patch of this
complexity causes more risk than benefit.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026