Comment 62 for bug 1751252
Revision history for this message
|
|
#62 |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
67d34a1
(Get the code!)
It's been a few months so my memory is not completely clear. I do however think Uli's statement is incorrect in the final two sentences:
> What the patch does is to make XShmAttach synchronous (aka "slow"). I do not
> know why, but nothing in this bug report suggests that this is necessary.
> The description of the patch does not say anything about this either.
> XShmAttach() should not just randomly fail, so why does the patch try to
> handle random failures?
attachment 139297 mentions multiple times "why" it is necessary to make it synchronous. Because it's impossible to detect errors in XShmAttach otherwise.
It's possible we're using to the wrong bug here, but I believe the patch is still correct and we have no choice but to make XShmAttach slow. You can only choose between maximum performance or reliable error handling, and not have both. The reasons are detailed in attachment 139297.