Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 15:41:21 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
To: "Matthew H. Gerlach" <gerlach AT netcom DOT com>
cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: initializing RCS files on network drive
In-Reply-To: <199803191804.KAA01867@netcom16.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.980322154023.12221B-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk


On Thu, 19 Mar 1998, Matthew H. Gerlach wrote:

> With a failed un_link RCS checks errno.  If its set to ENOENT, then
> rcs is happy.  Since the network drive returns a EACCESS failure,
> rcs complains.  On the local drive, the un_link sets errno to
> ENOENT.

Let me see if I understand this correctly.

RCS calls the `unlink' function.  The argument of the call is a
non-existent file.  But on a networked drive, this causes the EACCES
failure rather than ENOENT.

Is this correct?  If it is, I think I can send you a change for the
library function `remove' which will correct this problem.

> The last problem I seem to have is related to locking preexisting ,v files.  
> If UNIX user Jane checks in a revision of file foo.c, Jane is the owner
> of the associated ,v file.  Now if win95 NFS user matt tries to lock the
> file, rcs complains of an EACCES error.  However, UNIX user matt, can
> lock the file eventhough Jane owns it.  Truely fixing the un_link problem
> instead of my work around will probably fix this problem as well, maybe.

See my other mail about this one.