[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] Implementation of fsync for Windows
From: |
Jim Meyering |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] Implementation of fsync for Windows |
Date: |
Wed, 01 Oct 2008 19:58:04 +0200 |
Eric Blake <address@hidden> wrote:
> Richard W.M. Jones <rjones <at> redhat.com> writes:
>> Like the earlier patch, but this relicenses to LGPLv2+, includes
>> license text, and assigns everything to the FSF.
>
> Do you have copyright on file for gnulib yet?
No.
Technically he doesn't need it, since the work was done on Red Hat time
and Red Hat has a blanket assignment. However, he volunteered to send
in the paperwork regardless.
>> --- a/NEWS
>> +++ b/NEWS
>> @@ -6,6 +6,8 @@ User visible incompatible changes
>>
>> Date Modules Changes
>>
>> +2008-10-01 fsync This function has been implemented for Windows.
>> +
>
> NEWS is for incompatible changes. But adding a new module is compatible. I
> would drop the NEWS entry.
Whoops. I suggested that, privately ;-)
>> +#else /* Windows */
>
> Technically, this is #else /* !Windows */
>
>> +lib/fsync.c
>> +m4/fsync.m4
>> +
>> +Depends-on:
>> +unistd
>
> Should this also depend on the errno module?
I wondered, but figured it's not needed since the code is
windows-specific. Anyone know otherwise?
>> +++ b/tests/test-fsync.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
> ...
>> +
>> +#include <stdio.h>
>
> Whoops. Always include <config.h> first in test cases.
Good catch.
Thanks for the quick feedback.
Re: [PATCH] Implementation of fsync for Windows, Richard W.M. Jones, 2008/10/01
Re: [PATCH] Implementation of fsync for Windows, Bruno Haible, 2008/10/01