From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-118929-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 3798 invoked by alias); 10 Jan 2015 16:41:36 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 3781 invoked by uid 89); 10 Jan 2015 16:41:33 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=no version=3.3.2
X-HELO: mtaout21.012.net.il
Received: from mtaout21.012.net.il (HELO mtaout21.012.net.il) (80.179.55.169) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Sat, 10 Jan 2015 16:41:31 +0000
Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout21.012.net.il by a-mtaout21.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NHY00800ZO37400@a-mtaout21.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2015 18:41:28 +0200 (IST)
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout21.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NHY007HBZP4YR80@a-mtaout21.012.net.il>; Sat, 10 Jan 2015 18:41:28 +0200 (IST)
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2015 16:41:00 -0000
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Append to input history file instead of overwriting it
In-reply-to: <CA+C-WL-E-vAXHCik8jLk9A-4E40tLLagkiNfo7nCPsbsU07gcQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Patrick Palka <patrick@parcs.ath.cx>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Message-id: <83sifi611j.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <CA+C-WL8uggYL3evJ6i78A6ySnfH-kGNaLb_a0-_3yLRm_2Si6g@mail.gmail.com> <1420903108-24831-1-git-send-email-patrick@parcs.ath.cx> <83wq4u63wu.fsf@gnu.org> <CA+C-WL88pk1tnTHp1FS_LMhNXiypmWify75d2eJW4w+2aLjRTA@mail.gmail.com> <83twzy62t5.fsf@gnu.org> <CA+C-WL-E-vAXHCik8jLk9A-4E40tLLagkiNfo7nCPsbsU07gcQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2015-01/txt/msg00263.txt.bz2

> From: Patrick Palka <patrick@parcs.ath.cx>
> Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2015 11:17:56 -0500
> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> 
> On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> >> From: Patrick Palka <patrick@parcs.ath.cx>
> >> Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2015 10:48:03 -0500
> >> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> >>
> >> > On Windows, a call to 'rename' fails if the destination already
> >> > exists.  Does the logic here cope with that?
> >>
> >> Hmm, the logic does not really cope with Windows' behavior here,
> >> because the above warning should only get emitted for unexpected
> >> failures.  So I suppose we should only emit the above warning if errno
> >> != EBUSY (perhaps only on Windows systems)?
> >
> > Why EBUSY?
> 
> Just a wild guess.  What would be the correct error code to check for?
>  Looks like it would be EACCES..

According to my testing, it's EEXIST.

> > We could also explicitly remove the target before the rename call (and
> > ignore any errors from that), which will make it work like on Posix
> > systems.
> 
> I don't think that would be sufficient.  In a hypothetical but
> plausible scenario, process GDB1 would call unlink(), process GDB2
> would then call unlink(), process GDB1 would then call rename()
> successfully, process GDB2 would then call rename() and fail on
> Windows despite calling unlink() on the destination.

What would you suggest that GDB2 does instead?  I see no solution here
that would not fail in some way.  Do you?