Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 11:35:24 +0300
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann)
Message-Id: <7458-Tue21Aug2001113524+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: acottrel AT ihug DOT com DOT au, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <10108202115.AA18011@clio.rice.edu> (sandmann@clio.rice.edu)
Subject: Re: Fseek on STDIN problem on Win 2K
References:  <10108202115 DOT AA18011 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: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:15:44 -0500 (CDT)
> 
> > If the device is not returned correctly, fstat will lie about st_dev,
> > and we could have different files that will look identical.
> 
> But right now this is only for files on A: and/or redirected handles,
> which is pretty rare that we fstat() and compare on those strange
> combinations.  Not impossible, but much less a problem than seek
> not working.

Granted, the lseek problem is a much more grave one, and we should try
to understand and fix it first.  But the fstat issue shouldn't be
ignored, either (unless fixing lseek fixes fstat eas well).