From: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann) Message-Id: <10209020454.AA16618@clio.rice.edu> Subject: Re: Two rm.exe issues on XP To: acottrel AT ihug DOT com DOT au (Andrew Cottrell) Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2002 23:54:47 -0500 (CDT) Cc: rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk (Richard Dawe), djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com In-Reply-To: <003501c2517e$2e4fdc30$0100a8c0@p4> from "Andrew Cottrell" at Sep 01, 2002 04:09:18 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 > > Using the rm.exe from simtel's fil41b.zip; and creating the exact > > directories/names as you did above, this works fine on my Win2K system. > I didn't try this yesterday, but I did once I read the email and the rm.exe > from simtel's fil41b.zip works fine with the example. I now expect that the > problem is in a 2.04 CVS LIBC change or series of changes. Confirmed - on Win2K the cvs libc built rm.exe fails like it does on your XP system. So CVS is broken compared to V2.03 refresh. > I have occasionally seen the inode error display on me for no apparent > reason. The error is :- > "ERROR: the directory %s initially had device/inode\n\ > numbers %lu/%lu, but now (after a chdir into it), the numbers for > `.'\n\ > are %lu/%lu. That means that while rm was running, the directory\n\ > was replaced with either another directory or a link to another > directory."), I haven't been using filutils 4.1 on Win2K, so I don't know if I would see this - but it seems to indicate our inode algorithm for Win2K isn't reproducible. Has the algorithm changed between V2.03 and CVS? > mode 3000 st_ino 1 st_dev 1CFF70 > 872 886 422 FAIL 426 897 943 957 985 738 I see the "FAIL" and this makes me concerned that some call died?