Calling close(fileno(fp)) prior to fclose(fp) is racy in a
multi-threaded application - some other thread could open a new file,
which is then inadvertently closed by the fclose that we thought
should fail with EBADF. For mingw, this is no worse than the race
already present in close_fd_maybe_sock
On 04/09/2011 03:02 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
> There was a new use of "can not" in coreutils despite
> my having performed this transformation before.
> Autoconf is the same: one current/new violation,
> in spite of applying the fix before.
> I noticed that James Youngman recently fixed one in findu
On 05/10/11 10:07, Eric Blake wrote:
> ./gnulib-tool --with-tests --test intprops
Thanks, I ran that and it worked.
> verify (! TYPE_IS_INTEGER (void *));
No, TYPE_IS_INTEGER is defined only for arithmetic types, so I left
that alone.
> verify (TYPE_SIGNED (double));
Thanks, I added that (see
On 05/10/2011 10:57 AM, Paul Eggert wrote:
> Here's a proposed module to test 'intprops'. It assumes the revised
> patch for integer overflow checking that I emailed a few minutes ago.
>
> I don't know the recommended way to test this with gnulib-tool;
> I read the --help output and the documenta
Here's a proposed module to test 'intprops'. It assumes the revised
patch for integer overflow checking that I emailed a few minutes ago.
I don't know the recommended way to test this with gnulib-tool;
I read the --help output and the documentation, but couldn't figure
it out. I tested it by han
On 05/06/11 03:41, Bruno Haible wrote:
>ADD_OVERFLOW (a, b, unsigned int)
> is easier to write and understand than
>ADD_OVERFLOW (a, b, 0, UINT_MAX)
OK, but "ADD_OVERFLOW (a, b)" is easier yet, no? And this would
address Ben's comment that the macro should check the types of the
arguments
Jim Meyering wrote:
> Bastien ROUCARIES wrote:
>
>> I disagree here:
>>> else
>>> {
>>> + /* Detect whether /proc/self/fd/../fd exists. On Linux, that
>>> name
>>> + resolves to /proc/self/fd, which was opened above. However,
>>> on
>>> + Solaris,
Bastien ROUCARIES wrote:
> I disagree here:
>> else
>> {
>> + /* Detect whether /proc/self/fd/../fd exists. On Linux, that name
>> + resolves to /proc/self/fd, which was opened above. However, on
>> + Solaris, it may resolve to /proc/self/fd/fd, whi
I disagree here:
> else
> {
> + /* Detect whether /proc/self/fd/../fd exists. On Linux, that name
> + resolves to /proc/self/fd, which was opened above. However, on
> + Solaris, it may resolve to /proc/self/fd/fd, which cannot exist,
> +
Eric Blake wrote:
> open/access/close is cheaper than open/stat/stat/close.
>
> * lib/openat-proc.c (openat_proc_name): Simplify.
> * modules/openat (Depends-on): Drop same-inode.
> Reported by Bastien ROUCARIES.
...
> diff --git a/lib/openat-proc.c b/lib/openat-proc.c
...
> @@ -80,15 +79,9 @@ open
10 matches
Mail list logo
