X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        bh=BNKPU4e2gW6v7hptFztMbd6tBpqoY6oIcZzFTvDRBgE=;
        b=u1dUBF5CZEiBfwzWZjR6OVic+WbTQWyvI6rbbEUseXku76NvfzA1hF30GlrFXoSe/F
         LzBk0uXa4P9oJweqVGkNLo/t0Sw4DFCXaVmun1hHOgb30+pH67l6eW/k3GUdbVv624Ay
         xIXKDY1LrZYsf3gdSjLUL9cEglZJXiMDmUdBq0of3VX0ft7EYtA/ay2CK/rBKI0J3pqS
         fFG3670FRHMDF6x07buEDd8jJOsm1SY8Oq6oX4JaHQSa9H03d8Ka/LIS179mhp59TiHl
         qT+T5gg8yuvq47O1NQcgdNbQrJS5MTe8h5b8JaU0cDb/ulogUYrlArk82HPWV0X7cp00
         OIpg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.42.249.8 with SMTP id mi8mr11628176icb.4.1398966918759; Thu,
 01 May 2014 10:55:18 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <83k3a5l8fk.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <CAA2C=vBuWHmVNrRAcGDSXYLc8Eg_xsyMVszPzrxqHGrpVq2vmw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<83wqeh9pwq DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org>
	<CAA2C=vD_97x3-A0Y52JDfbmmFiuVzF_Ufub6imhmuhTsdsNr4w AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<83vbu19o4f DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org>
	<CAA2C=vDAWcPpCex4koZXSdorEid7w1=QTAWip7t0n-exMH+vrQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<83r44p9mjr DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org>
	<CAA2C=vBWH49B_zu-1rAqxBvHoxKzZL+pqOANTE0H3MPQ2OkROg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<CAA2C=vD-a_Tx+ZzseEuZU_-U7eJYEsLFNwWVdKLmm85_7_N9qA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<83r44elogs DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org>
	<CAA2C=vCsFzQ9mip4ZTxL8+UPpqbZUQdX=ZDqzTK3V7zbgKm95g AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<83k3a5l8fk DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org>
Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 20:55:18 +0300
Message-ID: <CAA2C=vCEwn3dBZKd+YHFh53cLcMESfF5sCZzHgaY=S5AxwMgoQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] break xstat.c into pieces
From: Ozkan Sezer <sezeroz AT gmail DOT com>
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
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 5/1/14, Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT gnu DOT org> wrote:
>> Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 21:02:03 +0300
>> From: Ozkan Sezer <sezeroz AT gmail DOT com>
>>
>> #include <sys/stat.h>
>> #include <errno.h>
>> #include <stdio.h>
>> int main () {
>>    if (mkdir("C:",0755)<0) printf("C:  -> errno: %d\n",errno);
>>    if (mkdir("C:\\",0755)<0) printf("C:\\ -> errno: %d\n",errno);
>>    if (mkdir("C:/",0755)<0) printf("C:/ -> errno: %d\n",errno);
>>    if (mkdir(".",0755)<0) printf(". -> errno: %d\n",errno);
>>    if (mkdir("hexen2",0755)<0) printf("hexen2  -> errno: %d\n",errno);
>>    if (mkdir("hexen2\\",0755)<0) printf("hexen2\\ -> errno: %d\n",errno);
>>    return 0;
>> }
>>
>> Running the exe from C:\ prints the following:
>>
>> Under dosbox:
>>
>> C:  -> errno: 10
>> C:\ -> errno: 22
>> C:/ -> errno: 10
>> . -> errno: 10
>> hexen2  -> errno: 10
>> hexen2\ -> errno: 22
>
> Is this on Windows or some other OS (I'm not sure I understand what do
> you mean by "dosbox")?

http://www.dosbox.com/

>
> If this isn't on Windows, could someone please test on XP?  I'm
> somewhat worried about the C:\ case above.
>

Just tested on a real dos i.e. IBM PC DOS 7 installed on a pentium 166:

C:  -> errno: 22
C:\ -> errno: 10
C:/ -> errno: 10
. -> errno: 10
hexen2  -> errno: 10
hexen2\ -> errno: 22

Same results with and without the patch applied

>> >> --- /dev/null
>> >> +++ src/libc/posix/sys/stat/statbits.c	24 Apr 2014 07:51:10 -0000
>> >
>> > I really don't see why a single short variable should have its own
>> > source file.
>>
>> That would be you, but not me,
>>
>> >   I think I suggested to add the variable to crt1.c.
>> > Could you please do that instead?
>>
>> No, that won't be my suggestion. I can't see how a 500% irrelevant
>> flag var can go into crt1.c.  Feel free to do so yourself, though.
>
> How about moving it to is_exec.c?  AFAICT, every library function that
> accesses djstat_flags also calls _is_executable, so it sounds like no
> additional bloat will follow if we move the variable there.
>
> Thanks.
>

I don't see why a new file is so very offending, but OK I guess ..

Regards.

--
O.S.