Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> when encountering dirs missing the executable bit, du used to spit out an
> error but continue on its way ... with the new version though, the error
> forces premature failure with an helpful message :(
>
> for example, this dir structure as a non-root us
Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> when encountering dirs missing the executable bit, du used to spit out an
>> error but continue on its way ... with the new version though, the error
>> forces premature failure with an helpful message :(
>>
>>
Andreas Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> when encountering dirs missing the executable bit, du used to spit out an
>>> error but continue on its way ... with the new version though, the error
>>> forces
Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Then you must be using libc-2.4 or newer, right?
Right.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SuSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
PGP key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED
On Wednesday 08 November 2006 03:58, Jim Meyering wrote:
> Thanks for the report, but I cannot reproduce that.
> Here's what I've done (as non-root, with a 2.6.18-based kernel):
as Andreas hinted, it's when using the newer *at functions ... my system is
2.6.18 with glibc-2.5
-mike
pgpI95qBXOgAM
Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 08 November 2006 03:58, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> Thanks for the report, but I cannot reproduce that.
>> Here's what I've done (as non-root, with a 2.6.18-based kernel):
>
> as Andreas hinted, it's when using the newer *at functions ... my syste
Paul Eggert wrote:
Matthew Woehlke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Eh? How is testing if ((1<<1)>>1) == 1 "too strict"?
It's not. But it wasn't clear from your earlier posting whether the
failure was 1LL<<1>>1 or 1LL<<63>>63. The latter is not required to
yield 1 (assuming long long is 64 bits),
