GNU bug report logs - #32305
mingw vs do_chown in gzip

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 32305 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 32305 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
To: Bdale Garbee <bdale <at> gag.com>
Cc: gzip bugs <bug-gzip <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Re: mingw vs do_chown in gzip
Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2018 11:31:06 -0700

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Bdale Garbee wrote:

> I'm (finally) working on updating the gzip in Debian to something newer
> than 1.6, which caused me to stumble over the addition of the do_chown
> function in gzip.c.  That's because I need to build both native Debian
> and Windows binary packages, the latter in support of a portion of the
> Debian installer system that has something to do with Windows.
> 
> The problem is that mingw doesn't provide uid_t or gid_t definitions,
> perhaps just because there isn't really an equivalent ownership
> construct in Windows?

Yes, that must be it. I installed the attached into gzip master on Savannah; 
does it fix things for you?

[0001-gzip-port-better-to-mingw.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Message #8 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Bdale Garbee <bdale <at> gag.com>
To: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
Cc: gzip bugs <bug-gzip <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Re: mingw vs do_chown in gzip
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2018 11:31:50 +0800

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu> writes:

> Yes, that must be it. I installed the attached into gzip master on Savannah; 
> does it fix things for you?

That fixes the compilation of gzip.c, but of course causes a link
failure since it leaves two calls to function do_chown() that is no
longer defined.

The hack I used to build the Debian gzip 1.9-1 upload I did last night
is to conditionally add two bogus typedefs and elide the function
content if __MINGW32__ is defined.  So far, that seems to work ok.  My
patch is attached to this email.

It does feel like an "ugly" approach, but I just got confused trying to
unwind how the configure code which learns there are no *chown()
functions in the mingw environment didn't actually cause the right
things to happen in the build.  Since apparently I'm the first person to
stumble over this since you added do_chown shortly after the gzip 1.6
release, I doubt it's worth much more time from either of us to come up
with a "cleaner" patch...

Feel free to use some or all of my patch, but I am also happy to update
may packaging for Debian if you choose to put more time in this and
develop a better solution. 

Regards,

Bdale

[fix-mingw-compile.diff (text/x-diff, attachment)]

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #11 received at 32305 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
To: Bdale Garbee <bdale <at> gag.com>
Cc: 32305 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#32305: mingw vs do_chown in gzip
Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2018 00:39:34 -0700

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Bdale Garbee wrote:
> That fixes the compilation of gzip.c, but of course causes a link
> failure since it leaves two calls to function do_chown() that is no
> longer defined.

I installed into Savannah master the attached patch, which should be a bit 
cleaner. Does it fix things for you?

[0001-gzip-port-better-to-mingw-again.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Message #14 received at 32305 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Bdale Garbee <bdale <at> gag.com>
To: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
Cc: 32305 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#32305: mingw vs do_chown in gzip
Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2018 08:01:28 +0800

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu> writes:

> I installed into Savannah master the attached patch, which should be a bit 
> cleaner. Does it fix things for you?

Yep, thanks!  I've updated my packaging repo to use your approach for
the 1.9-2 upload.

Bdale

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #19 received at 32305-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
To: Bdale Garbee <bdale <at> gag.com>
Cc: 32305-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#32305: mingw vs do_chown in gzip
Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2018 20:36:42 -0700

Thanks for checking the fix; closing the bug report.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.