X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mailnull set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
Sender:	rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk
Message-ID:	<3CC72CFD.5391DAFE@phekda.freeserve.co.uk>
Date:	Wed, 24 Apr 2002 23:09:01 +0100
From:	Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.19 i586)
X-Accept-Language:	de,fr
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
CC:	"Peter J. Farley III" <pjfarley AT dorsai DOT org>
Subject:	Re: PATCH: fcntl and F_GETFL, mark 2
References:	<10204061918 DOT AA13504 AT clio DOT rice DOT edu>
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Hello.

Charles Sandmann wrote:
> 
> > > > +On Windows NT/2000/XP this cannot report the open mode correctly -
> > > > +@code{O_RDWR} is always returned.
> > >
> > > I'm not sure on this.  I didn't have time to patch/build everything,
> > > but I extracted the code which did modes and printed them to the
> > > screen, and it gave 2 for handles 0..3 and 1 for handle 4 (it didn't
> > > fail getting sft).  The difference in value may indicate it actually
> > > works on Win2K.
> >
> > So perhaps we should change the docs wording to say that it _might_
> > be unable to report the open mode correctly (the code already does
> > TRT, I believe).
> 
> I would prefer we don't put anything at all unless we know there is a
> problem.

I tried the code on a Win2k box at work and it appears to work. So I guess it
would work on WinXP too.

I've just tested it under WinNT4+SP5 with SFN (no LFN TSR) under VMware 3.1
and the results are weird. _get_sft_entry_ptr in src/libc/posix/fcntl/fcntl.c
returns some value, but then files are reported as read-only irrespective of
what mode they were opened with. So it looks like the return value from
_get_sft_entry_ptr is bogus. Or maybe the SFT it points to is bogus.

Looking back at my mail, I see that _get_sft_entry_ptr appeared with the
locking patches. Is it supposed/know to work on Windows NT?

The SFT handling code in fstat is pretty different. I wonder if that works OK.

BTW debugging under VMware 3.1 seems to work pretty well. It's much better
than under VMware 2.0. I haven't had any VMware crashes yet (touch/knock on
wood, fingers crossed, etc.).

Thanks, bye, Rich =]

-- 
Richard Dawe [ http://www.phekda.freeserve.co.uk/richdawe/ ]

- Raw text -