[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: no feedback on snapshot? coreutils-7.5 coming soon
From: |
Pádraig Brady |
Subject: |
Re: no feedback on snapshot? coreutils-7.5 coming soon |
Date: |
Thu, 13 Aug 2009 10:57:26 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071008) |
Pádraig Brady wrote:
> Jim Meyering wrote:
>> AFAIK, I am the only one who has built the latest snapshot:
>>
>> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.coreutils.bugs/17604
>>
>> Though it's been only two days.
>>
>> Unless I hear of new bug reports or portability problems soon,
>> expect coreutils-7.5 to be released in the next few days.
>
> checks pass on Fedora 11 and Ubuntu 7.10
> 2 failures on Fedora Core 5 due to copy::utimensat_if_possible() failing with:
>
> $ (cd tests && make check TESTS=cp/abuse VERBOSE=yes)
> cp: preserving times for `c/1': No such file or directory
>
> $ (cd tests && make check TESTS=mv/part-symlink VERBOSE=yes)
> mv: preserving times for `loc_reg': Too many levels of symbolic links
These highlighted a couple of issue I think on systems without utimensat().
1. The symlink _target_ gets its time updated
2. If 1 fails then the process returns a failure
I've fixed both in the attached patch hopefully
by only doing the explicit utimensat() on symlinks,
and only giving a warning if errno==ENOTSUP.
Note it might be cleaner to add a O_NOFOLLOW flag to
utimens() in gnulib, but that would be more invasive.
I also tweaked the tests not to fail on systems
without utimensat().
cheers,
Pádraig.
>From d337e3c7c081e1262ea13fbe239938c451b0a93d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: =?utf-8?q?P=C3=A1draig=20Brady?= <address@hidden>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 10:39:10 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] cp, mv: fix issues with preserving timestamps of copied
symlinks
* src/copy.c (copy_internal): On systems without utimensat() don't
revert to utimens as that will update the timestamp of the symlink
target. Also just warn on systems without utimensat(), don't fail.
* tests/cp/abuse: To work around a failure on systems without
utimensat(), use cp -dR rather than cp -a.
* tests/mv/part-symlink: Skip the test on systems without
utimensat(), as mv -b will warn there, messing up the test.
---
src/copy.c | 20 +++++++++++---------
tests/cp/abuse | 2 +-
tests/mv/part-symlink | 6 ++++++
3 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/copy.c b/src/copy.c
index bed90c4..068eef7 100644
--- a/src/copy.c
+++ b/src/copy.c
@@ -118,18 +118,17 @@ static bool owner_failure_ok (struct cp_options const *x);
static char const *top_level_src_name;
static char const *top_level_dst_name;
-/* Wrap utimensat-with-AT_FDCWD and utimens, to keep these
- cpp directives out of the main code. */
+/* Try to update the timestamp of a symlink.
+ We don't revert to utimens as that will follow the link. */
static inline int
-utimensat_if_possible (char const *file, struct timespec const *timespec)
+utimens_symlink (char const *file, struct timespec const *timespec)
{
- return
#if HAVE_UTIMENSAT
- utimensat (AT_FDCWD, file, timespec, AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW)
+ return utimensat (AT_FDCWD, file, timespec, AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW);
#else
- utimens (file, timespec)
+ errno = ENOTSUP;
+ return -1;
#endif
- ;
}
/* Perform the O(1) btrfs clone operation, if possible.
@@ -2117,10 +2116,13 @@ copy_internal (char const *src_name, char const
*dst_name,
timespec[0] = get_stat_atime (&src_sb);
timespec[1] = get_stat_mtime (&src_sb);
- if (utimensat_if_possible (dst_name, timespec) != 0)
+ if ((dest_is_symlink
+ ? utimens_symlink (dst_name, timespec)
+ : utimens (dst_name, timespec))
+ != 0)
{
error (0, errno, _("preserving times for %s"), quote (dst_name));
- if (x->require_preserve)
+ if (x->require_preserve && ! (dest_is_symlink && errno == ENOTSUP))
return false;
}
}
diff --git a/tests/cp/abuse b/tests/cp/abuse
index 285c531..e9086b8 100755
--- a/tests/cp/abuse
+++ b/tests/cp/abuse
@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ for i in dangling-dest existing-dest; do
test $i = existing-dest && echo i > t
test $i = dangling-dest && rm -f t
- cp -a a/1 b/1 c 2> out && fail=1
+ cp -dR a/1 b/1 c 2> out && fail=1
compare out exp || fail=1
diff --git a/tests/mv/part-symlink b/tests/mv/part-symlink
index 78da70a..576bb40 100755
--- a/tests/mv/part-symlink
+++ b/tests/mv/part-symlink
@@ -27,6 +27,12 @@ fi
cleanup_() { rm -rf "$other_partition_tmpdir"; }
. "$abs_srcdir/other-fs-tmpdir"
+# without utimensat() mv -b will give warnings about not
+# being able to preserve the timestamps of symlinks.
+# So just skip the test on older systems like this.
+grep '^#define HAVE_UTIMENSAT' "$CONFIG_HEADER" > /dev/null ||
+ skip_test_ 'system will warn about preserving timestamps of symlinks'
+
pwd_tmp=`pwd`
# Unset CDPATH. Otherwise, output from the `cd dir' command
--
1.6.2.5
- Re: no feedback on snapshot? coreutils-7.5 coming soon, (continued)
- Re: no feedback on snapshot? coreutils-7.5 coming soon, Jim Meyering, 2009/08/16
- Re: no feedback on snapshot? coreutils-7.5 coming soon, C de-Avillez, 2009/08/16
- Re: no feedback on snapshot? coreutils-7.5 coming soon, Pádraig Brady, 2009/08/12
- Re: no feedback on snapshot? coreutils-7.5 coming soon, Pádraig Brady, 2009/08/12
- Re: no feedback on snapshot? coreutils-7.5 coming soon, C de-Avillez, 2009/08/12
- Re: no feedback on snapshot? coreutils-7.5 coming soon, C de-Avillez, 2009/08/12
- Re: no feedback on snapshot? coreutils-7.5 coming soon, Jim Meyering, 2009/08/13
- Re: no feedback on snapshot? coreutils-7.5 coming soon, Jim Meyering, 2009/08/13
- Re: no feedback on snapshot? coreutils-7.5 coming soon, Pádraig Brady, 2009/08/13
- Re: no feedback on snapshot? coreutils-7.5 coming soon, Jim Meyering, 2009/08/13
Re: no feedback on snapshot? coreutils-7.5 coming soon,
Pádraig Brady <=
Re: no feedback on snapshot? coreutils-7.5 coming soon, Eric Blake, 2009/08/14
- Re: no feedback on snapshot? coreutils-7.5 coming soon, Jim Meyering, 2009/08/14
- Re: no feedback on snapshot? coreutils-7.5 coming soon, Eric Blake, 2009/08/14
- Re: no feedback on snapshot? coreutils-7.5 coming soon, Jim Meyering, 2009/08/14
- Re: no feedback on snapshot? coreutils-7.5 coming soon, Eric Blake, 2009/08/14
- Re: no feedback on snapshot? coreutils-7.5 coming soon, Jim Meyering, 2009/08/14
- Re: no feedback on snapshot? coreutils-7.5 coming soon, Eric Blake, 2009/08/14