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
Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 15:13:41 -0500
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Bug somewhere between cygwin, gcc and cvs
Message-ID: <20021225201340.GA17288@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <20021225193919 DOT GA6905 AT redhat DOT com> <Pine DOT GSO DOT 4 DOT 44 DOT 0212251455530 DOT 25600-100000 AT slinky DOT cs DOT nyu DOT edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0212251455530.25600-100000@slinky.cs.nyu.edu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i

On Wed, Dec 25, 2002 at 03:06:33PM -0500, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>On Wed, 25 Dec 2002, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Dec 25, 2002 at 02:29:17PM -0500, Arkadiy Belousov wrote:
>> >The version currently available does not support specifying port in
>> >CVSROOT.  And I need that for ssh tunneling.
>> >
>> >I do realize I am on the bleeding edge here.  Still, it's something to
>> >look at when CVS 1.11.2 is ported.  Personally, I think it's the
>> >compiler.  Let's wait till gcc loses (prerelease) label on it.
>>
>> Despite appearances to the contrary, cygwin's gcc is based on the
>> released version of gcc 3.2.  There is no better version being planned.
>>
>> It sounds to me like this is a problem with opening a directory using
>> open, as was previously suggested.
>
>If I understand the documentation at
>http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007904975/functions/open.html
>corectly, open()ing a directory is not explicitly prohibited (in fact, the
>phrasing of one error value,
>
>[EISDIR]
>    The named file is a directory and oflag includes O_WRONLY or O_RDWR.
>
>suggests that it is allowed).  Besides, the code only uses the file
>descriptor in a subsequent call to fchdir()...  Am I missing something
>here?

You may be missing the fact that saying "a problem with opening a directory"
is not equivalent to saying "Cygwin isn't supposed to work this way."

Pierre Humblet submitted a patch to fix a problem opening directories on
Windows 9x/Me last week.

So, as always, trying a new cygwin snapshot is a good idea.

cgf

--
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/