On 2 November 2016 at 10:09, Christophe Lyon <christophe.l...@linaro.org> wrote: > On 27 October 2016 at 15:34, Jonathan Wakely <jwak...@redhat.com> wrote: >> On 26/10/16 09:24 +0200, Christophe Lyon wrote: >>> >>> Hi Jonathan, >>> >>> On 25 October 2016 at 17:32, Jonathan Wakely <jwak...@redhat.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Two more fixes for the filesystem TS, and improved tests. >>>> >>>> Handle negative times in filesystem::last_write_time >>>> * src/filesystem/ops.cc >>>> (last_write_time(const path&, file_time_type, error_code&)): >>>> Handle >>>> negative times correctly. >>>> * testsuite/experimental/filesystem/operations/last_write_time.cc: >>>> Test writing file times. >>>> >>>> Fix error handling in copy_file and equivalent >>>> * src/filesystem/ops.cc (do_copy_file): Report an error if >>>> source >>>> or >>>> destination is not a regular file (LWG 2712). >>>> (equivalent): Fix error handling and result when only one file >>>> exists. >>>> * testsuite/experimental/filesystem/operations/copy.cc: Remove >>>> files >>>> created by tests. Test copying directories. >>>> * testsuite/experimental/filesystem/operations/copy_file.cc: >>>> Remove >>>> files created by tests. >>>> * testsuite/experimental/filesystem/operations/equivalent.cc: New. >>>> * testsuite/experimental/filesystem/operations/is_empty.cc: New. >>>> * testsuite/experimental/filesystem/operations/read_symlink.cc: >>>> Remove >>>> file created by test. >>>> * testsuite/experimental/filesystem/operations/remove_all.cc: New. >>>> * testsuite/util/testsuite_fs.h (~scoped_file): Only try to remove >>>> file if path is non-empty, to support removal by other means. >>>> >>>> Tested x86_64-linux, committed to trunk. >>>> >>>> >>> I can see failures in >>> experimental/filesystem/operations/last_write_time.cc after your >>> committed this patch: >>> >>> /aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/experimental/filesystem/operations/last_write_time.cc:127: >>> void test02(): Assertion 'last_write_time(f.path) == time' failed. >>> on arm*linux* and aarch64*linux* targets. >> >> >> That test will fail for targets where _GLIBCXX_USE_UTIMENSAT is not >> defined, as they use utime() instead which only supports second >> granularity. >> >> This should solve it, by only checking that the file times are within >> one second of the expected value. >> > > Hi Jonathan, > Indeed your patch fixes the problem I reported. > Sorry for the delay, I was on holidays. >
.... but experimental/filesystem/iterators/recursive_directory_iterator.cc now fails at execution on "old" arm targets (when forcing -march=armv5t). Christophe > Thanks, > > Christophe > > >> >> Tested x86_64-linux, committed to trunk.
