Call for testing Cygwin snapshot (problem with inode numbers)

[Peter Rehley]

Hi,

On the latest snapshot it seems that the inode calculation is  
broken.  I noticed it in the current snapshot (20051130), but traced  
it back to the 20051128 snapshot.  It only appears to be a problem  
when I have a mac os x share mounted to a drive on windows.    When I  
try with a windows share or a linux share I don't seem to have the  
problem.

The problem that I'm seeing is that the inode value isn't unique when  
listing a directory (or using any program that uses the inode value).

The inode that comes back from doing a ls -li is first much shorter  
that a normal inode.  I've included lists from my share when using  
the 20051123 snapshot and then they 20051128 snapshot.  The only  
change that I've done between the two is update cygwin using the  
cygwin-inst snapshot file.

I'm including test cases of listing (ls -li) using the 20051123  
snapshot and the 20051128.  I'm also including an strace for the  
20051128 sample.

Let me know if you need additional information.

Peter

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: cygcheck.out
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 70614 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/attachments/20051201/1488d7a1/attachment.obj>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: list_test_20051123.txt
URL: <http://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/attachments/20051201/1488d7a1/attachment.txt>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: list_test_20051128_strace.txt
URL: <http://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/attachments/20051201/1488d7a1/attachment-0001.txt>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: list_test_20051128.txt
URL: <http://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/attachments/20051201/1488d7a1/attachment-0002.txt>
-------------- next part --------------


On Nov 30, 2005, at 9:11 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:

> Since we're much too long on the way to the 1.5.19 release and there
> are already way too many changes since 1.5.18, we would again like to
> ask people for testing the latest snapshot, 2005-Nov-30, from
>
>   http://www.cygwin.com/snapshots/
>
> Please report back in this thread when you encounter a problem, which
> you can't reproduce with 1.5.18.  We're interested in regressions in
> the first place.
>
> 1.5.19 has also some new functionality over 1.5.18.  If you have  
> sources
> which take advantage of that stuff if present, we're also  
> interested in
> getting feeedback about those:
>
>   - clock_getres, clock_setres.
>   - fts(3) functions (BSD).
>   - futimes.
>   - getline, getdelim.
>   - memmem.
>   - mlock,munlock.
>   - mmap(..., MAP_NORESERVE) for anonymous maps.
>   - pread, pwrite.
>   - readdir_r.
>   - strptime's 'c and 'Z' formats.
>   - timelocal, timegm.
>
> Keep in mind that we can easier find problems if you attach a brief,
> concise, selfcontained testcase, if possible in plain C, which allows
> easy reproducing.
>
> If nothing's overly badly broken, we're planning to release 1.5.19
> within the next week.  Keep your fingers crossed.
>
> Again, please report all problems as reply to this mail.
>
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Corinna
>
> -- 
> Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding  
> Cygwin to
> Cygwin Project Co-Leader          cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
> Red Hat, Inc.
>
> --
> Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
> Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
> Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
> FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
>
>


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