I'm a bit late coming to this thread, sorry. The "oldfind" (i.e.
not-fts) implementation of find iterates over a directory like this:
while (1)
{
const char *namep;
const struct dirent *dp;
/* We reset errno here to distinguish between
end-of-director
On 23/06/16 08:04, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> BTW:
> gnulib's FTS was copied from coreutils which in turn comes from glibc
> which still looks quite similiar:
> https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=history;f=io/fts.c
> They also still don't catch readdir() errors there, so shouldn't we inform
On 06/23/2016 01:38 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> On 22/06/16 23:53, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
>> On 06/22/2016 03:01 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>>> It'll need this on top, to better differentiate FTS_ERR and FTS_DNR,
>>> as fts_build may be called multiple times for the same dir.
>>
>> Hmm, but rm(1) won
On 22/06/16 23:53, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> On 06/22/2016 03:01 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> It'll need this on top, to better differentiate FTS_ERR and FTS_DNR,
>> as fts_build may be called multiple times for the same dir.
>
> Hmm, but rm(1) won't show the errno.
Right, as FTS_DNR is actually p
On 06/22/2016 03:01 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> It'll need this on top, to better differentiate FTS_ERR and FTS_DNR,
> as fts_build may be called multiple times for the same dir.
Hmm, but rm(1) won't show the errno.
I'm getting better results with the attached, i.e., handling the
readdir() failure
On Wed, 22 Jun 2016, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
On 06/22/2016 02:48 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
On 22/06/16 13:18, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
Unfortunately, it seems we don't have test for fts.c, do we?
Not that I know of.
For effective testing of this you'd have to use something like cmocka,
or more
On 22/06/16 14:47, P. Benie wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Jun 2016, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
>
>> On 06/22/2016 02:48 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>>> On 22/06/16 13:18, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
Unfortunately, it seems we don't have test for fts.c, do we?
>>>
>>> Not that I know of.
>>> For effective testing
On 22/06/16 12:00, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> On 21/06/16 19:58, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
>> forwarding to gnulib.
>>
>> Have a nice day,
>> Berny
>>
>>
>> Forwarded Message --------
>> Subject: [Bug 984910] rm fails to detect errors in r
On 06/22/2016 02:48 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> On 22/06/16 13:18, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
>> Unfortunately, it seems we don't have test for fts.c, do we?
>
> Not that I know of.
> For effective testing of this you'd have to use something like cmocka,
> or more generically something like CharybdeFS
On 22/06/16 13:18, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> On 06/22/2016 01:00 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> How about the attached instead?
>
> That's a sensible solution.
>
>> diff --git a/lib/fts.c b/lib/fts.c
>> index bcdcff9..d022633 100644
>> --- a/lib/fts.c
>> +++ b/lib/fts.c
>> @@ -1461,9 +1461,15 @@ fts
On 06/22/2016 01:00 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> How about the attached instead?
That's a sensible solution.
> diff --git a/lib/fts.c b/lib/fts.c
> index bcdcff9..d022633 100644
> --- a/lib/fts.c
> +++ b/lib/fts.c
> @@ -1461,9 +1461,15 @@ fts_build (register FTS *sp, int type)
> while (cur
On 21/06/16 19:58, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> forwarding to gnulib.
>
> Have a nice day,
> Berny
>
>
> Forwarded Message ----
> Subject: [Bug 984910] rm fails to detect errors in readdir(3)
> Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 19:26:24 +
&g
forwarding to gnulib.
Have a nice day,
Berny
Forwarded Message
Subject:[Bug 984910] rm fails to detect errors in readdir(3)
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 19:26:24 +
From: bugzilla_nore...@novell.com
Andreas Stieger changed bug 984910
<http://bugzilla.opensuse.
13 matches
Mail list logo
