Re: Status of the MSYS/MSVC port

[Charles Wilson]

Peter Rosin wrote:
> Maybe, here are the errors:
> 
> So, I guess these declarations should do it (untested):
> 
> int _setmode (int, int);
> int _spawnv (int, const char *, const char * const *);
> #ifndef _P_WAIT /* just in case */
> # define _P_WAIT        0
> #endif

_P_WAIT is guarded in MSVC's process.h by #ifndef _POSIX_ (as opposed to
__STRICT_ANSI__). In MinGW's process.h, it is not guarded at all (but
P_WAIT is guarded by _NO_OLDNAMES).


> #ifndef _STAT_DEFINED
> struct _stat
> {
>     _dev_t    st_dev;        /* Equivalent to drive number 0=A 1=B ... */
>     _ino_t    st_ino;        /* Always zero ? */
>     _mode_t    st_mode;    /* See above constants */
>     short    st_nlink;    /* Number of links. */
>     short    st_uid;        /* User: Maybe significant on NT ? */
>     short    st_gid;        /* Group: Ditto */
>     _dev_t    st_rdev;    /* Seems useless (not even filled in) */
>     _off_t    st_size;    /* File size in bytes */
>     time_t    st_atime;    /* Accessed date (always 00:00 hrs local
>                  * on FAT) */
>     time_t    st_mtime;    /* Modified time */
>     time_t    st_ctime;    /* Creation time */
> };
> #endif /* _STAT_DEFINED */

Something is not right here. I took a look at the pre-preocessed output
from mingw-gcc -std=c89 -E lt-foo.c, and both 'struct stat' and 'struct
_stat' were declared. Further, looking at the MinGW sys/stat.h, I can't
see where any of the compile flags we are using -- even the restrictive
ones -- would exclude those declarations.

Are you using the MSVC include files here? I thought the test case was:
"On MSYS/MinGW, stresstest.at now passes when "Run tests with low
max_cmd_len", that fails on git master. On the other hand, "cwrapper for
uninstalled executables" fails at cwrapper.at:78 (both with and without
low max_cmd_len)."

MSYS/MinGW, *not* msvc?

Now, if there are MSVC problems, we'll have to fix those, too. But I
want to be clear on exactly what we're discussing...

> int _stat (const char *, struct _stat *);
> #ifndef S_IXUSR /* just in case */
> # define    S_IXUSR        _S_IXUSR
> #endif
> int _chmod (const char *, int);
> char * _getcwd (char *, int);
> 
> But IMHO, the struct _stat declaration is horrible to have in the
> code. Shouldn't we just #undef __STRICT_ANSI__ before we include
> anything or something? It's not as if that define helps...

Well, it's not just __STRICT_ANSI__, it's also _POSIX_ sometimes. Maybe
you're right, and we should #undef __STRICT_ANSI__ and #def _POSIX_
before including headers.  However, adding a few more function
declarations is not so bad...so I could go either way, so long as we
figure out why you're not getting the struct _stat declaration.

--
Chuck