Re: rename() over NFS

2010-12-25 Thread Jim Meyering
Bruno Haible wrote: > A followup to 2010-11-13 > : > > On a Linux 2.6.16.60 machine, I still get failures from 'test-rename' > and 'test-renameat' over NFS: > > test-rename.h:279: assertion failed > FAIL: test-renameat > > The

Re: rename() over NFS

2010-12-25 Thread Bruno Haible
A followup to 2010-11-13 : On a Linux 2.6.16.60 machine, I still get failures from 'test-rename' and 'test-renameat' over NFS: test-rename.h:279: assertion failed FAIL: test-renameat The reason is that the mkdir() call at l

Re: rename() over NFS

2010-11-13 Thread Bruno Haible
Eric Blake wrote: > For now, I'm okay with weakening the testsuite to ignore the NFS bug; > please apply this patch, but let's also document the bug. OK. Done like this: 2010-11-13 Bruno Haible rename, renameat: Document Linux bug with NFS

Re: rename() over NFS

2010-11-13 Thread Eric Blake
On 11/13/2010 07:13 AM, Bruno Haible wrote: > So, assuming Eric also agrees with approach (a), here's a proposal for > fixing the testsuite: > > > 2010-11-13 Bruno Haible > > rename, renameat: Avoid test failures at NFS mounted locations. > * tests/test-rename.h (dentry_exists, as

Re: rename() over NFS

2010-11-13 Thread Eric Blake
On 11/13/2010 07:30 AM, Jim Meyering wrote: > Bruno Haible wrote: >> Jim Meyering wrote: >>> if you see ways to improve things without impacting performance >>> or maintainability, I'm all for it. >> >> Maintainability wouldn't be impacted, because the fix would be to use >> lib/rename.c, with >>

Re: rename() over NFS

2010-11-13 Thread Jim Meyering
Bruno Haible wrote: > Jim Meyering wrote: >> if you see ways to improve things without impacting performance >> or maintainability, I'm all for it. > > Maintainability wouldn't be impacted, because the fix would be to use > lib/rename.c, with > #define RENAME_DEST_EXISTS_BUG 1 > #define RENAME_

Re: rename() over NFS

2010-11-13 Thread Bruno Haible
Jim Meyering wrote: > if you see ways to improve things without impacting performance > or maintainability, I'm all for it. Maintainability wouldn't be impacted, because the fix would be to use lib/rename.c, with #define RENAME_DEST_EXISTS_BUG 1 #define RENAME_HARD_LINK_BUG 1 But performance

Re: rename() over NFS

2010-11-13 Thread Jim Meyering
Bruno Haible wrote: > [bug-coreutils readers: This is a reply to > ]. > > Paul Eggert wrote: >> > What should we do? >> > a) Patch the test so that it uses a readdir() loop to detect the absence >> > of >> > the file even

Re: rename() over NFS

2010-11-13 Thread Bruno Haible
[bug-coreutils readers: This is a reply to ]. Paul Eggert wrote: > > What should we do? > > a) Patch the test so that it uses a readdir() loop to detect the absence > > of > > the file even when stat() pretends it's still