Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Mark nix::unistd::fork as unsafe. #1293

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 3, 2020
Merged

Mark nix::unistd::fork as unsafe. #1293

merged 2 commits into from
Oct 3, 2020

Conversation

vi
Copy link
Contributor

@vi vi commented Sep 10, 2020

Fix tests. No change in documentation.

Resolves #1030.

Don't forget to bump major version number to 0.19.

@vi
Copy link
Contributor Author

vi commented Sep 10, 2020

r? @asomers

Copy link
Member

@asomers asomers left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Since this change is backwards-incompatible, it needs a good explanation in the CHANGELOG. Could you please add one?

@vi
Copy link
Contributor Author

vi commented Sep 11, 2020

Added changelog entry.

@asomers
Copy link
Member

asomers commented Sep 12, 2020

Now the compiler is complaining about "unnecessary unsafe block". Can you please fix those?

@vi
Copy link
Contributor Author

vi commented Sep 12, 2020

It is not caused by the changed code, it's just master brach is not buildable anymore.

I submitted a separate pull request with an easy way to fix it: #1294.

Copy link
Member

@asomers asomers left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This LGTM, though it will obviously need to be rebased after #1294 lands.

@vi
Copy link
Contributor Author

vi commented Sep 20, 2020

@asomers Rebased the pull request.

@vi
Copy link
Contributor Author

vi commented Oct 3, 2020

@asomers, Shall something more be done about this pull request?

Copy link
Member

@asomers asomers left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nope. I think it's good to go.

bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors bot commented Oct 3, 2020

Build succeeded:

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Shall safety status of unistd::fork be the same as std's Process::pre_exec?
2 participants