Re: [PATCH] libstdc++-v3: check for openat

[Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com>]

On Tue, 28 Jun 2022 at 13:04, Alexandre Oliva <oliva@gnu.org> wrote:
>
> On Jun 28, 2022, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > I'll push this today.
>
> Thanks!
>
> > You can just use --enable-libstdcxx-debug
>
> Thanks again ;-)
>
> > Again, that test is *supposed* to return without creating the
> > destination. It's testing the failure case.
>
> Aha, and that's why one shouldn't debug something without looking at the
> code to see what it's *supposed* to do ;-)
>
> >> FAILED: default@libstdc++,27_io,filesystem,operations,copy_cc
> >> FAILED: default@libstdc++,experimental,filesystem,operations,copy_cc
> >>
> >> .../27_io/filesystem/operations/copy.cc:5[67]: void test01():
> >> Assertion '!exists(to)' failed.
>
> > I don't know what 5[67] means
>
> Sorry for being unclear, it's just that the corresponding failing
> asserts are at different lines in the two mentioned testcases, and I
> tried to convey that fact with regexp notation.

Doh! Of course. I thought it was some rtems thing. /facepalm


>
> > Which suggests to me another problem with mkstemp / nonexistent_path.
>
> *lightbulb powers up*
>
> Now it all makes sense.
>
> It isn't *another* problem, that probably regressed when the mkstemp
> patch went in and so it got out of my radar and thus out of the patchset
> I used in subsequent test runs, but because of the way I use the testing
> system, the baseline on top of which the patchset was installed was
> still was still that of the previous nightly build, so I effectively
> dropped the mkstemp fix.  And since when I joined this project this bug
> had already been fixed, I didn't associate the regressions with the
> patch.

Makes sense.

> Apologies for the noise.  Today's baseline, plus your _At_path patch and
> my remove_all patch, is all clear.  Yay!

Great!