From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: First cut at git port to Cygwin Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 14:10:02 -0700 Message-ID: <7vk6gnpvf9.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <20051005155457.GA30303@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <20051005191741.GA25493@steel.home> <20051005202947.GA6184@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <81b0412b0510060205v4cd510c9wb4b06a3ed9242c8@mail.gmail.com> <81b0412b0510060307q431b64edt4196553bce28346c@mail.gmail.com> <81b0412b0510070544v3e7cf0b4n521db8ff7e4e335a@mail.gmail.com> <20051007205450.GA14827@steel.home> <20051007212250.GA1423@steel.home> <4346E8AC.5030503@citi.umich.edu> <20051007213952.GA8821@steel.home> <7vr7avrgr2.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Oct 08 23:11:55 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EOLxp-0003ay-BN for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sat, 08 Oct 2005 23:10:41 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751094AbVJHVKa (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Oct 2005 17:10:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751135AbVJHVKa (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Oct 2005 17:10:30 -0400 Received: from fed1rmmtao08.cox.net ([68.230.241.31]:40951 "EHLO fed1rmmtao08.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751094AbVJHVK3 (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Oct 2005 17:10:29 -0400 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.4.9.127]) by fed1rmmtao08.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with ESMTP id <20051008210949.SCP776.fed1rmmtao08.cox.net@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>; Sat, 8 Oct 2005 17:09:49 -0400 To: Johannes Schindelin In-Reply-To: (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Sat, 8 Oct 2005 21:04:44 +0200 (CEST)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Johannes Schindelin writes: >> PROT_WRITE is true, but we do MAP_PRIVATE, and if I recall >> correctly we do not write file via mmap -- at least we do not >> intend to. > > Ahh! Reading the man page helps! > >> Yes. It might have been overkill that you supported writing >> changes back, though. > > Sure. Something like this? Not, really. What I meant was to rip out the writing out altogether, and perhaps making sure that the caller never calls us without MAP_PRIVATE.