Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 09:40:31 +0300 From: "Eli Zaretskii" Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il To: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann) Message-Id: <557-Wed15Aug2001094031+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il> X-Mailer: Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.3.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9 CC: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com In-reply-to: <10108150440.AA14928@clio.rice.edu> (sandmann@clio.rice.edu) Subject: Re: _open.c development dif - Win2000 hacking References: <10108150440 DOT AA14928 AT clio DOT rice DOT edu> 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 > From: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann) > Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 23:40:26 -0500 (CDT) > > What's interesting is on my test code I get extra 7160 failures to > the screen - from fstat() ? Is this looking for magic numbers or something? Sorry, I'm probably missing something, because I cannot figure out where do those failures happen. Can you elaborate, and perhaps show some code fragments and error messages? > More interesting stuff - if 7160 fails, but _chmod succeeds I think this > is a way under Windows 2000 to know it's a device! Indeed. > One thing I need to know - how do people use the directoryname/nul detection > to determine if a directory exists? I don't think you need to worry about that: no code I know of uses this to test for an existing directory. It's normally either `stat' or `access (..., D_OK)', but not directory/nul. > Better to fail (not support dirname/nul) or better > to have it succeed and cause dev info problems later (appear as a disk > file instead of a device). It's better to fail. We can document that. Will look into your code later today. Thanks.