X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
	:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	bh=jhsE07p4VKOn1J6EYWqe6xUSzenQ24EK5qU09yEpz7c=;
	b=tBe0WGqdLWA4NmFB+eUTSiyrZLNx5KbNhp0JqA0lxpt6Ng0Ja9e26rqzuCDxgLHh/q
	GR1Lw8U9PL8H8HmD/n9OfDrvEBSV3LKwIcOmWOf2GouRmaMYq4tdqGYjeUFTFqjj4gUz
	n70lH2+ecmwxfCLKn+Y++J+0rTLMHijwkg41M=
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<201109291250.53638.juan.guerrero@gmx.de>
References:	<201109282235 DOT 01944 DOT juan DOT guerrero AT gmx DOT de>
	<CAA2C=vC51ca3kqtTFhVP5g8gQVNT_=GfAbm_Fb_eRKv8pL5F_A AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<201109291250 DOT 53638 DOT juan DOT guerrero AT gmx DOT de>
Date:	Thu, 29 Sep 2011 13:59:08 +0300
Message-ID:	<CAA2C=vAX1Ra0f-FoUuDPXszHZC3k_P+8bJ9gSrsRxoKN=TYRWg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject:	Re: [Patch] Issues concerning the INT 21 Windows95 - LONG FILENAME
	FUNCTIONS (0x71XX) implementation.
From:	Ozkan Sezer <sezeroz AT gmail DOT com>
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-MIME-Autoconverted:	from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id p8TAxBmA022817
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

On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Juan Manuel Guerrero
<juan DOT guerrero AT gmx DOT de> wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 28. September 2011 schrieb Ozkan Sezer:
>> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:35 PM, Juan Manuel Guerrero
>> <juan DOT guerrero AT gmx DOT de> wrote:
>> > This is the last version of the patch to presented by me to fix the pending
>> > issues concerning the use of 0x7XX functions from the LFN API of windows.
>> > All reported bugs have been fixed.  Where appropiate the CF is set by ORing
>> > the register value, else it is simply set to 1.  This patch only fixes the 2.04
>> > version of djdev.  It has been compiled and tested with gcc 4.6.1 and gcc 3.4.4.
>> > There is no 2.03 support.
>> > For 2.03 support a mayor effort will be required.  See the thread:
>> > <http://www.delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi?p=djgpp-workers/2011/09/17/11:39:42>
>> > and others.  This effort could only be justified if new djdev203[bs].zip files
>> > would be uploaded.  I do not think that any average djgpp user will check out
>> > the djdev203 branch from the repository and build his one fixed libc.  So DJ
>> > must decide if this is worth to be done.
>> > Concerning this patch, I will wait a couple of days and if no one complains
>> > I will commit it.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Juan M. Guerrero
>>
>> Made an interdiff of the previous and the current version and
>> noticed that in ansi/stdio/_rename.c and ansi/stdio/remove.c
>> you specifically moved setting of CF out of the if(LFN) like
>> condition i.e. always setting it regardless of LFN: can it have
>> any side effects?
>
> No side effects at all.
>

OK then.

As a feedback, I compiled the latest cvs snapshot+this patch
using gcc-4.4.7 on an x86_64 linux host, no errors and no new
warnings due to this patch.

> Regards,
> Juan M. Guerrero
>
>

--
O.S.

- Raw text -