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: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 22:13:00 -0400
From: Jason Tishler <jason AT tishler DOT net>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: cygwin-1.5.4-1 breaks fetchmail on Win9x
Message-ID: <20031007021300.GA1596@tishler.net>
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <3F7F77B0 DOT 853C8E40 AT alphalink DOT com DOT au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3F7F77B0.853C8E40@alphalink.com.au>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i

Chris,

On Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 11:45:20AM +1000, Mark Ord wrote:
> The source for cygwin-1.3.22 has the line code segment
> (winsup/cygwin/syscalls.cc - unlink() ):
>
> if (GetFileAttributes (win32_name) == INVALID_FILE_ATTRIBUTES
>     || (!win32_name.isremote () && wincap.has_delete_on_close ()))
> [snip]
>
> The source for cygwin-1.5.5 has the line code segment:
> (winsup/cygwin/syscalls.cc - unlink() - line 177):
> 
> if (GetFileAttributes (win32_name) == INVALID_FILE_ATTRIBUTES
>     || !win32_name.isremote ())
> [snip]
> 
> Notible is that wincap.has_delete_on_close() *isn't* called/checked
> in the 1.5.5 code.

It appears that the following commit removed the
wincap.has_delete_on_close() check:

    http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-cvs/2003-q1/msg00400.html

Specifically, the following hunk:

    -      if (!win32_name.isremote ()
    -     || (GetFileAttributes (win32_name) == INVALID_FILE_ATTRIBUTES
    -         || wincap.has_delete_on_close ()))
    +      if (GetFileAttributes (win32_name) == INVALID_FILE_ATTRIBUTES
    +     || !win32_name.isremote ())

AFAICT, the ChangeLog is not congruent with the above.  Did another
unrelated change sneak in accidentally?

BTW, there seemed to be some gyration regarding this section of unlink()
during that time period:

    $ for ((i=254;i<296;i=i+1))
    > do
    > echo 1.$i
    > cvs up -p -r 1.$i syscalls.cc | fgrep wincap.has_delete_on_close
    > done
    1.254
              || (!win32_name.isremote () && wincap.has_delete_on_close ()))
    1.255
    1.256
    1.257
                  || wincap.has_delete_on_close ()))
    1.258
                  || wincap.has_delete_on_close ()))
    1.259
    1.260
    ...

Thanks,
Jason

-- 
PGP/GPG Key: http://www.tishler.net/jason/pubkey.asc or key servers
Fingerprint: 7A73 1405 7F2B E669 C19D  8784 1AFD E4CC ECF4 8EF6

--
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/