Re: [PATCH] maint.mk: don't maintain a second build-aux variable.

2011-10-27 Thread Gary V. Vaughan
Hi Jim, On 27 Oct 2011, at 22:02, Jim Meyering wrote: > Gary V. Vaughan wrote: >> On 25 Oct 2011, at 15:18, Gary V. Vaughan wrote: >>> On 25 Oct 2011, at 15:05, Jim Meyering wrote: Actually, I think we can both get what we want. I suggest to adjust your patch so that make is guaranteed t

Re: stdalign: new module

2011-10-27 Thread Bruno Haible
Hi Paul, Thanks for this work! Testing it on various platforms, I see the following problems: 1) On MSVC 9, I get syntax errors in test-stdalign.c:90, the reason being an extraneous level of parentheses in # define _Alignas(a) __declspec ((align (a))) Once this is fixed, I get synt

Re: bug in fchownat in n32 and 64 ABIs

2011-10-27 Thread David Daney
On 10/27/2011 04:59 PM, Bruno Haible wrote: David Daney wrote: 'strace' of this program shows that the system call that returns with -1/EPERM is a call to SYS_6254 (in n32 ABI) or SYS_5250 (in 64 ABI). Can you get strace -- version 4.5.20 or later and build it for the corresponding ABI? That

Re: bug in fchownat in n32 and 64 ABIs

2011-10-27 Thread Bruno Haible
David Daney wrote: > > 'strace' of this program shows that the system call that returns with > > -1/EPERM > > is a call to SYS_6254 (in n32 ABI) or SYS_5250 (in 64 ABI). > > > Can you get strace -- version 4.5.20 or later and build it for the > corresponding ABI? That should properly decode the

Re: bug in fchownat in n32 and 64 ABIs

2011-10-27 Thread David Daney
On 10/27/2011 12:26 PM, David Daney wrote: On 10/27/2011 12:07 PM, Bruno Haible wrote: Hi Linux/MIPS folks, Found this bug by running the gnulib POSIX test suite: In the fchownat() call, an uid_t or gid_t of value (uid_t)-1 or (gid_t)-1 means no change. See

Re: bug in fchownat in n32 and 64 ABIs

2011-10-27 Thread David Daney
On 10/27/2011 12:07 PM, Bruno Haible wrote: Hi Linux/MIPS folks, Found this bug by running the gnulib POSIX test suite: In the fchownat() call, an uid_t or gid_t of value (uid_t)-1 or (gid_t)-1 means no change. See. This va

Re: stdalign: new module

2011-10-27 Thread Paul Eggert
Thanks for all those comments. I incorporated them and pushed the stdalign code, with the following extra patch, which I hope addresses all the comments. I'm using this in my test version of Emacs; see . One other thing: none of this stuff affec

bug in fchownat in n32 and 64 ABIs

2011-10-27 Thread Bruno Haible
Hi Linux/MIPS folks, Found this bug by running the gnulib POSIX test suite: In the fchownat() call, an uid_t or gid_t of value (uid_t)-1 or (gid_t)-1 means no change. See . This value is correctly recognized on all Unices, _e

Re: [PATCH] maint.mk: don't maintain a second build-aux variable.

2011-10-27 Thread Jim Meyering
Gary V. Vaughan wrote: > Hi Jim, > > On 25 Oct 2011, at 15:18, Gary V. Vaughan wrote: >> On 25 Oct 2011, at 15:05, Jim Meyering wrote: >>> Actually, I think we can both get what we want. >>> I suggest to adjust your patch so that make is guaranteed to fail >>> with a nice diagnostic for anyone who

Re: utimens failures on Linux

2011-10-27 Thread Eric Blake
On 10/27/2011 07:09 AM, Bruno Haible wrote: Any comments about this? -- Forwarded Message -- Hi Eric, On a Linux 2.6.32 / PowerPC machine [1], I'm seeing these three test failures: test-futimens.h:144: a

utimens failures on Linux

2011-10-27 Thread Bruno Haible
Any comments about this? -- Forwarded Message -- Hi Eric, On a Linux 2.6.32 / PowerPC machine [1], I'm seeing these three test failures: test-futimens.h:144: assertion failed FAIL: test-futimens test-ut

Re: test-utimensat failure on Linux/hppa

2011-10-27 Thread Bruno Haible
On 2011-10-01 I proposed: > 2011-10-01 Bruno Haible > > utimensat: Work around problem on Linux/hppa. > * lib/utimensat.c (rpl_utimensat) [Linux/hppa]: Reject invalid tv_nsec > values. > * doc/posix-functions/utimensat.texi: Mention the problem on Linux/hppa. There were