Re: msvc port: ensure pid_t is defined

2011-09-20 Thread Bruno Haible
> 2011-09-11 Bruno Haible > > Ensure pid_t gets defined. > * m4/time_h.m4 (gl_HEADER_TIME_H_BODY): Likewise. > * tests/test-time.c: Likewise. > * doc/posix-headers/time.texi: Likewise. The part regarding was unncessary, since POSIX:2008 want pid_t in only under "CPT"

Re: [PATCH 1/2] test-fsync: enhance tests

2011-09-20 Thread Bruno Haible
On mingw, I'm seeing this test failure: test-fsync.c:43: assertion failed FAIL: test-fsync.exe This fixes it. But the test then later failus at test-fsync.c:73: assertion failed 2011-09-20 Bruno Haible fsync tests: Avoid a test failure on mingw. * tests/test-fsync.c (main):

Re: getting EBADF on Cygwin

2011-09-20 Thread Eric Blake
On 09/20/2011 04:31 PM, Bruno Haible wrote: The new tests show that on Cygwin 1.7.9, the functions grantpt() and unlockpt() don't fail with EBADF as they should, when the fd argument is invalid. test-grantpt.c:34: assertion failed FAIL: test-grantpt.exe test-unlockpt.c:34: assertion failed FAIL

Re: getting EBADF on Cygwin

2011-09-20 Thread Bruno Haible
The new tests show that on Cygwin 1.7.9, the functions grantpt() and unlockpt() don't fail with EBADF as they should, when the fd argument is invalid. test-grantpt.c:34: assertion failed FAIL: test-grantpt.exe test-unlockpt.c:34: assertion failed FAIL: test-unlockpt.exe Bruno -- In memoriam Pie

Re: getting EBADF on mingw

2011-09-20 Thread Bruno Haible
I wrote: > I've added such tests for 'accept' and 'accept4'. More such tests are to come > for: > > bind > close > connect > dprintf > dup > dup2 > faccessat > fchdir > fchmod > fchown > fclose > fcntl > fdatasync > fdopen > fdopendir > fdutimensat > fflush > fg

Re: getting EBADF on MSVC

2011-09-20 Thread Bruno Haible
Paul Eggert wrote: > Emacs doesn't need to have a dummy msvc-inval.h file. You're missing the point. I have explained that you can create a replacement for this file in a single-line Makefile statement. I want the module description to contain this: Include: #include "msvc-inval.h" not this

Re: getting EBADF on MSVC

2011-09-20 Thread Bruno Haible
Paul Eggert wrote: > On 09/19/11 14:37, Bruno Haible wrote: > > Is this code (with a #if and two extra functions) really easier to > > understand > > than what we have in lib/dup2.c now? > > I find it easier to understand, because I can safely ignore > the stuff that's inside the "#if MSVC ..." b