delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: cygwin/2006/01/26/11:29:45

X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 11:29:32 -0500
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-no-personal-reply-please AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: new cygwin dlls
Message-ID: <20060126162932.GK26563@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <012620060339 DOT 28204 DOT 43D84462000B51C000006E2C22007374780A050E040D0C079D0A AT comcast DOT net> <20060126040648 DOT GE20309 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <6910a60601252311j3a967f16t AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <6910a60601252311j3a967f16t@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 08:11:23AM +0100, Reini Urban wrote:
>2006/1/26, Christopher Faylor <cgf-no-personal-reply-please AT cygwin DOT com>:
>> On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 03:39:14AM +0000, Eric Blake wrote:
>> >>Has a fix been found for building emacs on the new cygwin versions 5.19
>> >>and up yet?
>> >
>> >Yes - browse the list archives - the idea is that anywhere that emacs
>> >uses a non-zero d_ino to mean the entry returned from readdir is valid,
>> >just add a small patch to that area of code that treats ALL directory
>> >entries as valid without reading d_ino.
>>
>> FWIW, it looks like some of our highly trained on-staff programmers may
>> have a plan for resurrecting an all-singing/all-dancing d_ino for every
>> platform but NT4.
>>
>> So, expect d_ino in a snapshot soon - back in Cygwin by popular demand.
>> And, if you're using NT4 - well sorry.  You can blame that programmer or
>> programmers for not being clever enough to figure out how to make it
>> work there.
>
>So seperate emacs binaries for NT4 and Win95, besides the good >= XP?

No.  There would be no change in inode behavior for Win9x since those systems
do not have real inodes.  Only NT4 would suffer from the old problem of d_ino
being != st_ino.

But, then, one of our staff engineers has reported a setback in using this
technique so maybe I was premature in announcing victory.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -


  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright © 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019