Sender: rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk
Message-ID: <3E968A1B.65F7@phekda.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 10:25:47 +0100
From: Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.23 i586)
X-Accept-Language: de,fr
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Rob Kramer <robk AT starhub DOT net DOT sg>
CC: DJGPP workers <djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: Re: 2.04 fsync buglet?
References: <b75quh$1rv$1 AT mawar DOT singnet DOT com DOT sg>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Hello.

Rob Kramer wrote:
> When trying to cross compile 2.04 alpha, I had to apply the following tiny
> fix:
> 
> diff -c -3 -r1.2 fsync.c
> *** src/libc/compat/unistd/fsync.c      26 Mar 2003 19:46:33 -0000      1.2
> --- src/libc/compat/unistd/fsync.c      11 Apr 2003 07:34:47 -0000
> ***************
> *** 10,15 ****
> --- 10,16 ----
>   int
>   fsync(int _fd)
>   {
> +   __dpmi_regs r;
>     int oerrno = errno;
> 
>     /* Directory? If so, fail. */
> ***************
> *** 19,25 ****
>       return -1;
>     }
> 
> -   __dpmi_regs r;
>     r.h.ah = 0x68;
>     r.x.bx = _fd;
>     __dpmi_int(0x21, &r);
> --- 20,25 ----
> 
> Hmm, now how could it have compiled for you guys with a variable declaration
> in the middle of a function?

gcc 3.2.2 doesn't seem to complain. That's strange. Which version of gcc were
you using?

> revision 1.2
> date: 2003/03/26 19:46:33;  author: richdawe;  state: Exp;  lines: +10 -0
> Fail for directories.
> 
> Nobody compiled since 26/03, or am I missing something obvious? :)

I compiled before and after checking it in.

Thanks for the bug report. I will check your fix in.

Bye, Rich =]

-- 
Richard Dawe [ http://www.phekda.freeserve.co.uk/richdawe/ ]