I can repro it too. Looks as if the dirent.h implementation of the
mingw snapshot that the nightlies are using is spongled. Simple
stuff like
#include <stdio.h>
#include <errno.h>
#include <dirent.h>
int main()
{
DIR* dp;
struct dirent* de;
dp = opendir("c:\\");
while (de = readdir(dp)) {
printf("%s\n",de->d_name);
}
closedir(dp);
return 0;
}
fails. I'll upgrade and see if that improves matters.
--sigbjorn
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 08, 2005 10:31
Subject: Re: getDirectoryContents fails in GHC 6.5 snapshots,works in GHC
6.4.1 snapshots
On 8/8/05, Simon Marlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 29 July 2005 23:53, Brian Smith wrote:
> On 7/20/05, Brian Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> This bug breaks Cabal 1.0 and Cabal 1.1.1.
>> Expected results: passed
>> Actual results: *** Exception: c:\: getDirectoryContents: failed (No
>> error)
>>
I tried various versions and couldn't reproduce the error. I tried:
Yes, it fails for every directory. I actually noticed the problem by
when using Cabal, which uses getDirectoryContents. But, I did some
more testing. This works:
> ghc --make Main.lhs -o main
> main
passed
But, this fails:
> ghci Main.lhs
Prelude Main> main
*** Exception: C:\temp\bugs\getDirectoryContents:
getDirectoryContents: failed (
No error)
and this fails:
> runghc Main.lhs
*** Exception: C:\temp\bugs\getDirectoryContents:
getDirectoryContents: failed (
No error)
This indicates to me that there is not any problem with my filesystem.
Instead, it seems like it is likely a problem with the linker. Now, I
see what the cause of the problem is:
http://www.haskell.org//pipermail/cvs-ghc/2005-June/025579.html
Sigbjorn Finne sof at galois.com wrote on Mon Jun 20 12:29:24 EDT 2005:
I'll switch over to using gcc-3.4.2 for the nightly builds to see where
takes us.
And, in my previous message I wrote:
Build 20050620 works fine, but Build 20050622 fails.
I noticed that on 2005-06-21 the build failed. I also noticed that
before 2005-06-21, the tar.gz's are ~1 larger than the ones after
2005-06-21.
- Brian
_______________________________________________
Glasgow-haskell-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-bugs
_______________________________________________
Glasgow-haskell-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-bugs
