From:	sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann)
Message-Id:	<10308111710.AA15447@clio.rice.edu>
Subject:	Re: inode problem in `rm'
To:	eliz AT elta DOT co DOT il
Date:	Mon, 11 Aug 2003 12:10:07 -0500 (CDT)
Cc:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-Reply-To:	<7458-Mon11Aug2003190113+0300-eliz@elta.co.il> from "Eli Zaretskii" at Aug 11, 2003 07:01:13 PM
X-Mailer:	ELM [version 2.5 PL2]
Mime-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> > Since our inodes are not very reliable, and the security issues under
> > a DJGPP port are not as big an issue, I believe we should remove this
> > code from the DJGPP ports.
> 
> I'd suggest to try debugging this before giving up, we do want our
> `stat' to produce reliable inodes on all supported platforms.

How about a working rm while we wait?

- Raw text -