This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: findutils still broken
On Apr 22 07:49, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2005 at 10:37:50AM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >I'm not sure this presumption is correct. The d_ino field is not marked
> >as optional in SUSv3, it's marked as an XSI extension. The crux with
> >XSI extensions is that (quote SuSv3) "Application writers may confidently
> >make use of an extension on all systems supporting the X/Open System
> >Interfaces Extension." This covers practically every serious system in
> >the POSIX world right now. If we drop d_ino, I'd expect another round
> >of suddenly broken applications.
> If there are programs out there which rely on d_ino then they are broken
> on cygwin right now and have been for some time.
It's more the existance than the correctness what I'm taking about.
I can easily imagine applications using d_ino only for keeping track
of directory content. Mind you, I'm just concerned that dropping
the struct member could affect applications. OTOH, that's what porting
is for, isn't it?
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org
Red Hat, Inc.
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html