IRC.

1 files changed, 38 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/open_issues/fcntl_locking_dev_null.mdwn b/open_issues/fcntl_locking_dev_null.mdwn
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..4c65a5c4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/open_issues/fcntl_locking_dev_null.mdwn
@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc."]]
+
+[[!meta license="""[[!toggle id="license" text="GFDL 1.2+"]][[!toggleable
+id="license" text="Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this
+document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or
+any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant
+Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts.  A copy of the license
+is included in the section entitled [[GNU Free Documentation
+License|/fdl]]."]]"""]]
+
+[[!meta title="fcntl locking /dev/null"]]
+
+[[!tag open_issue_hurd]]
+
+
+# IRC, OFTC, #debian-hurd, 2012-07-06
+
+    <pinotree> regarding the libwibble failure (which holds libbuffy →
+      libbuffy-bindings), the failing test happens because it logs to /dev/null
+      as test file,
+    <pinotree> and while doing that, it wants to lock it first, having a
+      ENOTSUP in return
+    <youpi> oh
+    <youpi> locking null, how interesting
+    <youpi> what is that supposed to do ? :o)
+    <pinotree> from what i was reading posix, it would seem that such object is
+      considered a "File"
+    <youpi> is it our unimplemented record lock, or just the lock operation
+      that /dev/null doesn't support ?
+    <youpi> what size is null supposed to be? zero, right?
+    <pinotree> the latter
+    <youpi> ah
+    <youpi> so we can simply make lock return 0
+    <youpi> since there's no byte to lock?
+    <youpi> I don't remember whether you can lock unexistant bytes
+    <pinotree> indeed, if i change the libwibble unit test to use eg /tmp/foo,
+      they pas
+    <pinotree> s