bug-cvs
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Feature Branch Windows Build Broken - lib/canonicalize.c - ELOOP &


From: Derek Price
Subject: Re: Feature Branch Windows Build Broken - lib/canonicalize.c - ELOOP & lstat
Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 11:07:31 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317)

Conrad T. Pino wrote:

>Hi Derek,
>
>  
>
>>From: Derek Price
>>
>>I've just checked in a patch which replaces all references to "CVS_STAT"
>>with "stat" and all references to "CVS_LSTAT" with "lstat".  I've made
>>changes to the GNULIB modules to support this and submitted the changes
>>back to GNULIB.  I also checked them into CVS to speed up our resolution
>>of this issue.
>>    
>>
>
>I'm sorry to see CVS_STAT and CVS_LSTAT go.  They provided an abstraction
>that made CVS less platform bound.  The change makes us consistent with
>GNU Lib which wouldn't be a problem if they were open to Windows native
>API calls in GNU Lib code.
>  
>

Actually, because of errors similar to the ones you've been seeing on
Solaris, it sounds like GNULIB will be defining similar gl_stat and
gl_lstat macros.  I will either make the canonicalize module use those
and depend on the stat module or we can define both stat and gl_stat for
the windows port.

>>If you are feeling particularly motivated to ramp up the Windows support
>>in GNULIB, you could try to package the work wnt_stat and wnt_lstat do
>>on Windows into the GNULIB stat module and submit the whole back to
>>address@hidden, but it shouldn't be necessary and there has been
>>serious resistance there to adding anything to GNULIB modules like the
>>GetUTCFileModTime Windows system call that check_statbuf appears to be
>>making.
>>    
>>
>
>I'm willing to take on only what's possible and your opinion counts:
>
>Does GNULIB include the Windows platform in it's charter?
>  
>

Sometimes.  How are your arm wrestling skills?  :)

>If yes, what's your take on the resistance to Windows native API calls?
>  
>

Windows native API call resistance was pretty strong last time I came up
against it, but GNULIB team members were willing to suggest compromises
that at least compiled on Windows.

>Since our Windows support is "client" mode only do loops matter?
>  
>

Yes, to the extent that the Windows client will support a local
repository.  It may be true that the loops are impossible on Windows
since links are not processed in the same way.

Regards,

Derek





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]