X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status:	No, hits=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL
X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Message-ID:	<4D46B8E7.50507@gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 31 Jan 2011 13:28:07 +0000
From:	Dave Korn <dave DOT korn DOT cygwin AT gmail DOT com>
User-Agent:	Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914)
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: On "write" command
References:	<4D441414 DOT 1010407 AT alice DOT it> <4D4615E0 DOT 9040903 AT cygwin DOT com> <4D46A30D DOT 2010706 AT gmail DOT com> <20110131114919 DOT GJ1057 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
In-Reply-To:	<20110131114919.GJ1057@calimero.vinschen.de>
X-IsSubscribed:	yes
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On 31/01/2011 11:49, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> The utmp file is in the old utmp format for backward compatibility.  The
> utx functions are available and return a ut_tv field, but it's just
> extracted from the utmp ut_time field at function call time.  The right
> thing to do for write is to have a autoconf test for the ut_tv field
> and not using it, if it's not available.

  Nah, I was mistaken.  It actually works fine as-is.  I was fooled by the way
old utmp entries get the first char of the username NULled out into thinking
it was getting bad data, but a quick login convinced me that write actually
works just fine and all the util-linux maintainer needs do is add the
configure option to enable building it.

  I still think that utmp_data macro is going to return
&utmp_data_buf[nutdbuf] at some point, though.  Shouldn't it be "if (utix >=
nutdbuf)"?

    cheers,
      DaveK



--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -