[Bug libstdc++/10063] [3.4 Regression] stdio_filebuf broken

[Bug libstdc++/10063] [3.4 Regression] stdio_filebuf broken

[peturr02 at ru dot is]

PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10063



------- Additional Comments From peturr02 at ru dot is  2003-07-01 09:48 -------
Paolo Carlini wrote:
> Personally, I don't know what should we really do in order to be able to
> intermix flawlessly the current stdio_filebuf - which, at variance with the old
> situation ends up always issuing direct non blocking I/O syscalls, i.e., read,
> write, lseek and so on - with stdio.

Since this class doesn't use stdio any more, it should be named something other
than stdio_filebuf.

> Perhaps we should just hit the bullet and
> declare that this is now possible only with stdio_sync_filebuf?

Sounds good. stdio_filebuf was never really well suited for this purpose.

Petur

[Bug libstdc++/10063] [3.4 Regression] stdio_filebuf broken

[dhazeghi at yahoo dot com]

PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10063


dhazeghi at yahoo dot com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Severity|normal                      |critical
           Priority|P3                          |P1

[Bug libstdc++/10063] [3.4 Regression] stdio_filebuf broken

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Severity|critical                    |normal
   Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00         |2003-12-05 03:24:26
               date|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10063

[Bug libstdc++/10063] [3.4 Regression] stdio_filebuf broken

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2003-12-10 17:37 -------
Subject: Bug 10063

CVSROOT:	/cvs/gcc
Module name:	gcc
Changes by:	bkoz@gcc.gnu.org	2003-12-10 17:37:25

Modified files:
	libstdc++-v3   : ChangeLog 
	libstdc++-v3/config/io: basic_file_stdio.cc 
Added files:
	libstdc++-v3/testsuite/ext/stdio_filebuf/char: 10063-1.cc 
	                                               10063-2.cc 

Log message:
	2003-12-10  Benjamin Kosnik  <bkoz@redhat.com>
	
	PR libstdc++/10063
	* config/io/basic_file_stdio.cc (__basic_file::sys_open): Sync.
	* testsuite/ext/stdio_filebuf/char/10063-1.cc: New.
	* testsuite/ext/stdio_filebuf/char/10063-2.cc: New.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.2148&r2=1.2149
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/libstdc++-v3/config/io/basic_file_stdio.cc.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.24&r2=1.25
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/ext/stdio_filebuf/char/10063-1.cc.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=NONE&r2=1.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/ext/stdio_filebuf/char/10063-2.cc.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=NONE&r2=1.1



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10063

[Bug libstdc++/10063] [3.4 Regression] stdio_filebuf broken

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2003-12-10 18:41 -------
Fixed.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10063

[Bug libstdc++/10063] [3.4 Regression] stdio_filebuf broken

[paolo@gcc.gnu.org]

PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10063


paolo@gcc.gnu.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|paolo@gcc.gnu.org           |bkoz@gcc.gnu.org
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |NEW


------- Additional Comments From paolo@gcc.gnu.org  2003-05-23 08:59 -------
Benjamin, I'm tentatively assigning this to you as the guy currently working on
those issues.

Personally, I don't know what should we really do in order to be able to
intermix flawlessly the current stdio_filebuf - which, at variance with the old
situation ends up always issuing direct non blocking I/O syscalls, i.e., read,
write, lseek and so on - with stdio. Perhaps we should just hit the bullet and
declare that this is now possible only with stdio_sync_filebuf?

What do you think?

Paolo.



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.