Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 08:54:20 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Laurynas Biveinis <lauras AT softhome DOT net>
cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Patch: lchown()
In-Reply-To: <397F0384.D88CD100@softhome.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1000727085401.18864B-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
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
Precedence: bulk


On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, Laurynas Biveinis wrote:

> Also I am thinking about testsuite for both chown and lchown,
> how about following:

Thanks!

Several comments:

  - You need to set errno value to zero before calling a library
    function, if you want to test errno afterwards.  Otherwise, the
    value of errno might be from the wrong call.

  - It's usually best to test a file-related function on a variety of
    different file types: an ordinary file, a directory, a root
    directory (it's not a file on FAT filesystems), a character
    device, and a volume label.  Whether this is justified for a
    trivial function such as `lchown', is up to you ;-).

> Any suggestions for its implementation?

You mean, for the test program?  Just put it in an appropriate
directory under `tests/', and add a line to the makefile in that
directory.

> +This function does nothing under MS-DOS

There should be a period at the end of this sentence.