Re: LYNX-DEV Win32 Lynx

[Bela Lubkin]

Wayne Buttles wrote:

> On Mon, 17 Feb 1997, Bela Lubkin wrote:

> > Well, it's really rather low-impact in the first place.  Apparently the
> > Win32 development environment you're using is pretty close to
> > Unix/Posix.  Good.
> 
> I attribute that to the Lynx development team for keeping Lynx so
> portable.  The code is _very_ compiler friendly.

Excellent...

> > A lot of the patch has to do with avoiding SIGHUP on Win32.  Is that
> > because the symbol SIGHUP isn't defined, or because it acts incorrectly?
> 
> It is undefined.  There isn't any "kickstart" in Win95 :-(

> > If it's only that there is no such symbol as SIGHUP, the code should
> > probably read:
> > 
> >   #ifdef SIGHUP
> >   (void) signal(SIGHUP, ...);
> >   #endif /* SIGHUP */
> > 
> > which makes it generic.
> 
> I was winging it.  I figured as long as I kept using a long unique
> variable ( _WINDOWS ) it would be easy to grep later and sort
> everything out. 

Ok -- then take that as a suggestion for the "sorting out" phase.  In
fact, I had a similar feeling while reading through most of the patch.
Most of what you did (not all) was within the possible range of
variation for existing Unix systems, and could be done in a completely
portable manner.  So that's my recommendation -- when you are testing
for something missing, like SIGHUP, just key on whether it's missing.

>Bela<
;
; To UNSUBSCRIBE:  Send a mail message to address@hidden
;                  with "unsubscribe lynx-dev" (without the
;                  quotation marks) on a line by itself.
;