Re: mkdir(2) bug [Was: please test: coreutils-5.90-2]

> > On Oct 12 06:58, Eric Blake wrote: > > > I see the following bugs: > > > > > > $ ./foo // # should fail with EEXIST, not EROFS; no Windows call made > > > > We had this already. There's no such thing as a "correct" order of error > > messages. EROFS is as correct as EEXIST. If coreutils

Re: mkdir(2) bug [Was: please test: coreutils-5.90-2]

> On Oct 12 06:58, Eric Blake wrote: > > I see the following bugs: > > > > $ ./foo // # should fail with EEXIST, not EROFS; no Windows call made > > We had this already. There's no such thing as a "correct" order of error > messages. EROFS is as correct as EEXIST. If coreutils don't allow >

Re: mkdir(2) bug [Was: please test: coreutils-5.90-2]

On Oct 12 06:58, Eric Blake wrote: > I see the following bugs: > > $ ./foo // # should fail with EEXIST, not EROFS; no Windows call made > //: 30 Read-only file system > $ strace ./foo // | grep -B3 mkdir >65 18986 [main] foo 3788 build_fh_pc: fh 0x6115AE1C >34 19020 [main] foo 3788

mkdir(2) bug [Was: please test: coreutils-5.90-2]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Corinna Vinschen on 10/12/2005 1:47 AM: >>I am suspecting a cygwin bug here. mkdir("c:") should fail with EEXIST, >>not EACCES. 5.90 exposes this bug, where 5.3.0 did not, because the >>algorithm for mkdir -p was changed to attempt mkdir