From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6147 invoked by alias); 4 Dec 2007 16:43:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 6134 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Dec 2007 16:43:25 -0000 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DK_POLICY_SIGNSOME,FORGED_RCVD_HELO X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 04 Dec 2007 16:43:18 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C5299833F for ; Tue, 4 Dec 2007 16:43:17 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4609498100 for ; Tue, 4 Dec 2007 16:43:17 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1Izarc-0004Ct-Er for prelink@sourceware.org; Tue, 04 Dec 2007 11:43:16 -0500 Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2007 16:43:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: prelink@sourceware.org Subject: Re: More helpful error message during path walk Message-ID: <20071204164316.GA15848@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: prelink@sourceware.org References: <20071204161229.GA7758@caradoc.them.org> <20071204162410.GC16835@devserv.devel.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071204162410.GC16835@devserv.devel.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-09) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact prelink-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: prelink-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-q4/txt/msg00005.txt.bz2 On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 11:24:10AM -0500, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > I'd worry about ENOENT errors, because prelink.conf generally contains > a bunch of dirs that may not be present and that should be silent. > But in that case already stat64 at the beginning of gather_object > should fail with ENOENT and when implicit this should silently return, > so I guess the patch is ok. Please commit it. I verified that it doesn't cause a problem in that case. nftw64 calls the gather function for inaccessible directories, too, so that isn't affected. So mostly this has no effect except in whatever case prompted me to write it. Really must take better notes about these things... Thanks. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery