Re: pipe-filter self-tests

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Simon Josefsson on 8/24/2009 2:49 PM: > Simon Josefsson writes: > >> test-pipe.c:79: assertion failed >> test-pipe.sh: iteration 4 failed >> test-pipe.c:79: assertion failed >> test-pipe.sh: iteration 5 failed >> test-pipe.c:79: assertio

Re: proposal: module 'accept4'

Simon Josefsson wrote: > no objection from me. OK, I've added the module and applied the support for old kernels: 2009-08-24 Bruno Haible Tolerate declared but missing accept4 syscall. * lib/accept4.c (accept4): Invoke original accept4 function first, if available.

Re: tweak test-dup2

Eric Blake wrote: > +2009-08-24 Eric Blake > + > + dup2, pipe2: fix some recent test failures on cygwin 1.5.x > + * lib/pipe2.c (includes): Add binary-io.h. > + * lib/dup2.c (rpl_dup2): Correct buggy errno value. > + This is fine. You have green light. Thanks. > > + errno = 0; > >

Re: [PATCH] progname: also set global program_invocation_name, when possible

Hi Jim, > +2009-08-24 Jim Meyering > + > + progname: also set global program_invocation_name, when possible > + Before this change, a libtool-enabled program that calls glibc's > + error function would report the program name as > + "/abs/dir/.libs/lt-program_name" rather than t

Re: tweak test-dup2

Bruno Haible clisp.org> writes: > Let me know if you find these tweaks unreasonable. The first hunk is to > ensure that even if a non-empty test-dup2.tmp existed before the test, it > will not disturb the test. Looks good to me. Unfortunately... > + errno = 0; > + ASSERT (dup2 (fd, 1000)

Re: pipe-filter self-tests

Simon Josefsson writes: > test-pipe.c:79: assertion failed > test-pipe.sh: iteration 4 failed > test-pipe.c:79: assertion failed > test-pipe.sh: iteration 5 failed > test-pipe.c:79: assertion failed > test-pipe.sh: iteration 6 failed > test-pipe.c:79: assertion failed > test-pipe.sh: iteration 7

[PATCH] progname: also set global program_invocation_name, when possible

Hi Bruno, Before this change, I saw this: $ ./guestfish --help > /dev/full /w/co/libguestfs/fish/.libs/lt-guestfish: write error: No space left on device With the updated module, I get this: $ ./guestfish --help > /dev/full guestfish: write error: No space left on device I con

Re: clisp 2.48 doesn't compile with mingw

Sam Steingold wrote: > Cesar Romani wrote: >> I'm using MinGW 5.1.4 and gcc 3.4.5 on Win XP and I'm trying to compile >> clisp 2.48 with: >> configure --with-mingw --with-module=rawsock --with-ffcall >> --with-module=bindings/win32 >> >> and I got: >> >> >> ... >> gcc -mno-cyg

Re: clisp 2.48 doesn't compile with mingw

Cesar Romani wrote: I'm using MinGW 5.1.4 and gcc 3.4.5 on Win XP and I'm trying to compile clisp 2.48 with: configure --with-mingw --with-module=rawsock --with-ffcall --with-module=bindings/win32 and I got: ... make[4]: Leaving directory `/home/Romer/clisp-2.48/src' depbas

Re: proposal: module 'accept4'

Bruno Haible writes: > Will do as well for accept4 once Simon gives his opinion. I'm not using accept4 in any of my projects, so I don't care strongly. I'm generally in favor of adding anything that may be useful, assuming it doesn't break unrelated things, so no objection from me. /Simon

Re: proposal: module 'accept4'

On 08/24/2009 12:58 AM, Bruno Haible wrote: I would see this as a bug in the Linux distro. They should use the oldest supported kernel, not the newest one, for running the configure scripts of all packages. Distributions that (like RHEL) backport new features onto older kernels for many years

Re: O_SAFER

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Paolo Bonzini on 8/24/2009 5:20 AM: >> Yes, but better call it O_NONSTD > > O_NOSTDFD? I'm in the middle of writing an RFC email to lkml (with bug-gnulib in cc); I'm using the name O_NOSTD for now, but mentioning the other names we've th

Re: O_SAFER

On 08/24/2009 11:29 AM, Bruno Haible wrote: Eric Blake wrote: For that matter, proposing an O_SAFER to the glibc folks might be worthwhile. Yes, but better call it O_NONSTD O_NOSTDFD? If glibc or the kernel goes into this direction, it would be cool. Whether gnulib should define this O_SAF

Re: O_SAFER (was: fcntl module)

Eric Blake wrote: > For that matter, proposing an O_SAFER to the glibc folks might be worthwhile. Yes, but better call it O_NONSTD. The term "safer" will confuse people who care about security, I think, and is not specific. The term should make clear that it won't return any STD*_FILENO. > At whi

Re: fcntl module

Eric Blake wrote: > most users go via > "unistd--.h" which can adjust the #define appropriately. Good point. So we can go with a generic primitive under the hood, and don't need to provide the *_safer variant as a function - as a macro it is enough. > /* Duplicate FD into a new file descriptor,