On Sat, 25 Jan 2014, Darren Tucker wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 3:52 PM, Hisashi T Fujinaka <htodd at twofifty.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 25 Jan 2014, Darren Tucker wrote:
>>
>>> Maybe there's something wrapping write() on your system too? Try adding
>>> this to the start of atomicio.c:atomicio6():
>>>
>>> printf(stderr, "read %x write %x argument %x\n", read, vwrite, f);
>>>
>>> then compile it and run a small scp:
>>>
>>> $ ./scp testfile localhost:/tmp/
>>> read b73eced0 write b73ecf50 argument b73eced0
>>>
>>> The patch below makes the first argument to atomicio an int rather than
>>> a function pointer.
>>>
>>> On the plus side: it also allows the removal of some hacks around
>>> vwrite/writev. On the minus side: it's a large change albeit mostly
>>> mechanical.
>>
>>
>> I tried building after applying the patch, but I think I started in the
>> wrong place? I think I started with a fresh git clone.
>
> I think you started with a tree which had one of the changes I
> suggested upthread ( where I suggest changing the line to:
>
> pfd.events = f == vwrite ? POLLOUT : POLLIN;
I don't see that in my current tree.
>> Also, the scp told me it couldn't find /usr/local/bin/ssh. I'm guessing
>> there are environment variables I need.
>
> you can work around that with "./configure --prefix=/usr" for testing,
> but don't do "make install" unless you really want to replace the
> system binaries in /usr/{bin,sbin}
Wouldn't that test my local ssh?
>> atomicio.c:59:57: error: 'vwrite' undeclared (first use in this function)
>
> "vwrite" doesn't appear in the unmodified version of atomicio.c except
> in a comment.
I'm confused. Should I start with a clean tree or a modified tree? And
which patches should I use? I have a lot in my email at this point.
--
Hisashi T Fujinaka - htodd at twofifty.com
BSEE(6/86) + BSChem(3/95) + BAEnglish(8/95) + MSCS(8/03) + $2.50 = latte
