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

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<http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinep

Re: bug in fchownat in n32 and 64 ABIs

2011-10-27 Thread David Daney
ing ABI? That should properly decode the relevant syscalls. Once you have that, you might post the strace output. In the mean time I might give it a try with my 2.9 glibc on a 2.6.32.27 kernels. David Daney

Re: changing "configure" to default to "gcc -g -O2 -fwrapv ..."

2006-12-31 Thread David Daney
er overflows; treatment of division by 0, and all floating-point exceptions, varies between machines, and is usually adjustable by a library function. In chapter 2, section 2.5 it basically says the same thing. Those are the only two places the index indicates that 'overflow' i