Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 06:33:54 +0200
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: acottrel AT ihug DOT com DOT au
Message-Id: <1438-Fri21Mar2003063353+0200-eliz@elta.co.il>
X-Mailer: emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
CC: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com, rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk
In-reply-to: <003501c2eec7$e41e2a80$0100a8c0@acp42g> (acottrel@ihug.com.au)
Subject: Re: DJGPP 2.04 release? [Was: Re: nmalloc revisited]
References: <10303182107 DOT AA24101 AT clio DOT rice DOT edu> <3E7868E9 DOT 19949F8E AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> <9003-Wed19Mar2003174940+0200-eliz AT elta DOT co DOT il> <3E78AA1D DOT 23720139 AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> <3405-Wed19Mar2003223319+0200-eliz AT elta DOT co DOT il> <3E78D73C DOT 3B41ECF AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> <7263-Thu20Mar2003061743+0200-eliz AT elta DOT co DOT il> <003501c2eec7$e41e2a80$0100a8c0 AT acp42g>
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: "Andrew Cottrell" <acottrel AT ihug DOT com DOT au>
> Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 21:03:00 +1100
> 
> > Are you saying that the current code does _not_ invent inodes on
> > Windows/XP?  I'd be surprised, I thought we invent inodes for any
> > kind of files on all the versions of Windows except 3.1.
> 
> If the invent_inode is not passed a name then under Windows 2K/XP the inode
> number may change between calls

Right.  But when inode is computed in `stat', we _always_ have a file
name to pass to _invent_inode, right?

So what is the problem with `stat' on XP?  I understand what was the
problem with `fstat', but not the one with `stat'.