Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/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
X-WM-Posted-At: avacado.atomice.net; Thu, 2 May 02 10:49:19 +0100
Message-ID: <001301c1f1be$a130ba50$0100a8c0@advent02>
From: "Chris January" <chris AT atomice DOT net>
To: <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
References: <4 DOT 2 DOT 0 DOT 58 DOT 20020502091932 DOT 01343df8 AT ics DOT u-strasbg DOT fr>
Subject: Re: New snapshot with significant new functionality
Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 10:49:19 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000

> >No problems, but is all the following expected behaviour? Having
> >uncompressed the new .dll and copied it to /bin:
> >
> >1. had to make /proc using mkdir /proc

Yes, same way you have to mkdir /cygdrive if you want it to show up in a
directory listing I'm afraid.

> >
> >2. ls -al / doesn't actually show /proc
> >
> >3. ls -al /proc shows (something like)
> >
> >dr-xr-xr-x   10 0        medicine        0 Jan  1  1970 1951627
> >dr-xr-xr-x   10 0        medicine        0 Jan  1  1970 2022611
> >dr-xr-xr-x    7 0        medicine        0 May  2 07:11 registry
> >-r--r--r--    1 0        medicine        0 May  2 07:11 uptime
> >-r--r--r--    1 0        medicine        0 May  2 07:11 version
Hmm - maybe the process date/times could be set to when the process was
created.

> >
> >4. Note lack of . and ..
That's a bug.

> >
> >5. ls -al /proc/1951627 shows a lot of stuff, but
> >
> >6. ls -al /proc/2022611 gives
> >ls: /proc/2022611: No such file or directory

This is because process 2022611 is the process number of ls /proc, which has
gone away by the time you do the next ls.

There are a few other bugs that I'm aware of:
i) cat /proc/<dir> gives "File exists" instead of "Is a directory" error.
ii) cat /proc/nofile gives "No such file or directory" error (correct), but
cat /proc/<pid>/nofile gives "Read only file system" error.
iii) cp <file> /proc/nofile gives "No such file or directory" instead of
"Permission denied" or "Read only file system" error.

I'll try to fix these as and when I have the time.

Regards
Chris



--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/