Re: [Mingw-users] Re: More patch 2.5.9 hacking

[manubee]

Eli Zaretskii wrote:

>I cannot speak for Paul, who maintains Patch, but I doubt if this will
>happen unless you tell the details about why the assertion fails.  How
>can we expect Paul, or anyone else, to fix the code, if the problem is
>not understood?

I've documented that problem, ftell / fseek give unexpected results
in text mode.

[...]
>> +#ifdef __MINGW32__
>> +        mkdir (filename);
>> +#else
>> +        mkdir (filename,
>> +           S_IRUSR|S_IWUSR|S_IXUSR
>> +           |S_IRGRP|S_IWGRP|S_IXGRP
>> +           |S_IROTH|S_IWOTH|S_IXOTH);
>> +#endif
>
>Same here: I suggest to write a Posix-comlpiant version of `mkdir',
>which accepts (and largely ignores) the additional argument, and use
>that instead of the Windows version.

Apparently nobody reads what I'm posting, I'd rather go fishing :)
I've already submitted a patch for this.
I had no reply.

The mkdir.m4 macro just _DOESN'T_WORK_. It always returns "no",
while it should return "yes" under Windows.

Then GNU patch would configure and build successfully, there's
no need to patch anything else than the m4 macro.

Manu.

patch.diff
Description: Text document