From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EEB2F38207F2 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 13:13:11 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org EEB2F38207F2 Received: from mail-qv1-f72.google.com (mail-qv1-f72.google.com [209.85.219.72]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-25-sWO5dXsqNHyqwUBAVWih6Q-1; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 09:13:10 -0400 X-MC-Unique: sWO5dXsqNHyqwUBAVWih6Q-1 Received: by mail-qv1-f72.google.com with SMTP id m1-20020a0cf181000000b0046e65e564cfso12250382qvl.17 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 06:13:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=AlpH+/LdZ5iUTuB0R5/6Srr5dCxgdw7y0WKuzYiafgc=; b=5/svlnYfmCc40SOKHufMUsFZ8o2berlzmmj/Yaj8gUvkc0yIaVSlqXGPLT/xF8vjOa 6ZJbwldVI4PmGjVPm5GmJlVxclL9qdJ0P80LX0JokPFRpORgwP7fa5Wz/wC724eFK0om +liYcke6IgOVa9oJpz6G/OEpKJvgI5n2JohesC8H4sv157KK8zBdOS9OyI92AJDfLD/3 +G4X+Dlmj7NGI0V1aa1fKCdJsHl4oYwDcc9KOct2jpeEmc9DgORZ5gz7bHkMk13NKZ5W E4GvMnBU/rA1FIshJ7VtQUEPrWz+aN6H1ZzCCBcPUSAiaf4MhEBv+vTH6NK1Bz5ubto5 N0ng== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora8tsxPQIOTQSzzW6wvk96Rb6BTx70j2G8GjNWl+LEkO9AvONjAt PY20N9WIHzYVMB+37B573tIdZsXsLYU6q7qGJb5bBe18ja+cS9iof3YFgfIgWrw3CZzr2vppRxB V0UcVxH27moyysbmP71MDVb0DqUjW2bQ= X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:118a:b0:315:b54c:a9b7 with SMTP id m10-20020a05622a118a00b00315b54ca9b7mr12763643qtk.647.1656421989878; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 06:13:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1sekBuNXqY1PgUA3+/Vj3M7nTqh7pjJUxLOHuZqkkUyAbfpsuNfhXNx/TcbQWqzzNGsvfYqx3TQ9SZHVlePcfE= X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:118a:b0:315:b54c:a9b7 with SMTP id m10-20020a05622a118a00b00315b54ca9b7mr12763624qtk.647.1656421989579; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 06:13:09 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Jonathan Wakely Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2022 14:12:58 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] libstdc++-v3: check for openat To: Alexandre Oliva Cc: "libstdc++" , gcc Patches X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE, WEIRD_PORT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libstdc++ mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2022 13:13:13 -0000 On Tue, 28 Jun 2022 at 13:04, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > > On Jun 28, 2022, Jonathan Wakely 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!