On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 06:47:39PM -0500, Paul Swartz wrote:
> On 20 Feb 2003 at 22:40, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > As you can see, there's also nothing which would help you in using the
> > result to identify the sockets as being the same. Even the timestamps
> > aren't identical.
>
> No one fie
On 20 Feb 2003 at 22:40, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> I created a testcase which allows me to reproduce your observation.
> First of all let me say that thanks to your report I could find the
> problem in Cygwin which explains the differences between stat() and
> fstat(). However, I'm not quite sure
On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 01:23:43PM -0500, Paul Swartz wrote:
> OK, here's what the script looks like on Cygwin:
> -
> stat from filename (49536, 1374655, 27579L, 1, 1005, 513, 51,
> 1045764368, 1045764368, 1045764368)
> stat from fileno (49590, 1672, 2816L, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1045764368,
> 1045764
OK, here's what the script looks like on Cygwin:
-
stat from filename (49536, 1374655, 27579L, 1, 1005, 513, 51,
1045764368, 1045764368, 1045764368)
stat from fileno (49590, 1672, 2816L, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1045764368,
1045764368, 1045764368)
-
The lists correspond to (st_mode, st_ino, st_dev,
On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 02:02:40AM -0500, Paul Swartz wrote:
Content-Description: Mail message body
> The man page for stat/fstat says that the results
> returned should be the same. However, when asking
> for the fstat on a unix socket, the result is not
> the same. The attached python code d
The man page for stat/fstat says that the results
returned should be the same. However, when asking
for the fstat on a unix socket, the result is not
the same. The attached python code demonstrates
this problem. Is this an already known issue with
a solution already? Are there plans to res
6 matches
Mail list logo
