Havoc Pennington hp at redhat.com
Wed Sep 13 11:34:02 PDT 2006

John (J5) Palmieri wrote:
> So removing 3 sounds the most sane.  

There's nothing to remove right - it's not in cvs, alex's latest patch 
is only #4 without #3 iirc.

If you combine 1 and 2 (add recursive mutex funcs without a return 
value, and leave nonrecursive mutex funcs unmodified) then there's just 
a small patch to add four new funcs (recursive new/free/lock/unlock), 
and prefer them if they are present (make _dbus_mutex_* choose the 
recursive versions if possible).


More information about the dbus mailing list