[#7043] RUBYOPT versioning? — Caleb Tennis <caleb@...>
Matz, others:
[#7050] RDoc patches for BigDecimal in Ruby CVS — mathew <meta@...>
Now that 1.8.4 is out and the initial flurry of problem reports has died
[#7055] More on VC++ 2005 — Austin Ziegler <halostatue@...>
Okay. I've got Ruby compiling. I'm attempting to get everything in
Hi,
On 05/01/06, nobuyoshi nakada <nobuyoshi.nakada@ge.com> wrote:
On 06/01/06, Austin Ziegler <halostatue@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
On 09/01/06, nobuyoshi nakada <nobuyoshi.nakada@ge.com> wrote:
[#7057] 64-bit Solaris READ_DATA_PENDING Revisited — Steven Lumos <steven@...>
[#7078] CRC - a proof-of-concept Ruby compiler — Anders Hkersten <chucky@...>
Hello everyone,
[#7084] mathn: ugly warnings — hadmut@... (Hadmut Danisch)
Hi,
Hadmut Danisch wrote:
Daniel Berger wrote:
*Dean Wampler *<deanwampler gmail.com> writes:
On Fri, 13 Jan 2006, mathew wrote:
On Fri, 13 Jan 2006, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
ara.t.howard@noaa.gov wrote:
On Fri, 13 Jan 2006, James Britt wrote:
Dean Wampler <deanwampler gmail.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Jan 2006, mathew wrote:
[#7100] core dump with ruby 1.9.0 (2006-01-10) and bdb-0.5.8 — Tanaka Akira <akr@...17n.org>
I found following test script dumps core.
>>>>> "T" == Tanaka Akira <akr@m17n.org> writes:
In article <200601110905.k0B950Op001713@moulon.inra.fr>,
[#7109] Calling flock with block? — Bertram Scharpf <lists@...>
Hi,
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006, Bertram Scharpf wrote:
[#7129] YAML.load({[]=>""}.to_yaml) — Tanaka Akira <akr@...17n.org>
I found that current YAML doesn't round trip {[]=>""}.
Hi.
Hi.
In article <20060115202203.D3624CA0.ocean@m2.ccsnet.ne.jp>,
[#7162] FileUtils.mv does not unlink source file when moving over filesystem boundary — Pav Lucistnik <pav@...>
Hi,
On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Pav Lucistnik wrote:
[#7178] Add XHTML 1.0 Output Support to Ruby CGI — Paul Duncan <pabs@...>
The attached patch against Ruby 1.8.4 adds XHTML 1.0 output support to
[#7186] Ruby 1.9 and FHS — "Kirill A. Shutemov" <k.shutemov@...>
Build and install system changes:
[#7195] trouble due ruby redefining posix function eaccess — noreply@...
Bugs item #3317, was opened at 2006-01-24 15:33
[#7197] SSL-enabled DRb fds on SSLError? — ctm@... (Clifford T. Matthews)
Howdy,
On Jan 24, 2006, at 12:46 PM, Clifford T. Matthews wrote:
Patch worked fine against HEAD.
[#7203] bcc32's memory manager bug — "H.Yamamoto" <ocean@...2.ccsnet.ne.jp>
Hi.
[#7211] Some troubles with an embedded ruby interpreter — Matt Mower <matt.mower@...>
Hi folks,
[#7216] String#scan loops forefever if scanned string is modified inside block. — noreply@...
Bugs item #3329, was opened at 2006-01-26 10:55
[#7226] Fwd: Re: Question about massive API changes — "Sean E. Russell" <ser@...>
Hello,
Sean E. Russell wrote:
>
On 1/28/06, Caleb Tennis <caleb@aei-tech.com> wrote:
On Saturday 28 January 2006 17:13, Wilson Bilkovich wrote:
Sean E. Russell wrote:
[#7249] PATCH: append option to sysread — Yohanes Santoso <ysantoso-rubycore@...>
[#7259] TCP/UDP server weird lags on 1.8.4 linux — "Bill Kelly" <billk@...>
Hi !
Re: FileUtils.mv does not unlink source file when moving over filesystem boundary
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006, Jacob Fugal wrote:
> On 1/16/06, ara.t.howard@noaa.gov <ara.t.howard@noaa.gov> wrote:
>> to emulate mv with copy really is shocking.
>
> Am I mistaken, or isn't that how the OS handles move across filesystem
> boundaries anyways? You'll notice this chunk of code (copy_entry,
> unlink) only happens in the rescue block for Errno::EXDEV.
if you mean that programs like 'mv' work this way then you are quite right.
afaik my os (linux) does not support a move (rename) across an fs boundary.
but this isn't an OS call - it's a method in a high level language.
>> at minimum this code should do something like
>>
>> def transfer_entry s, d, hidden = true, ext = "tmp"
>> dirname, basename = File.split d
>> tmp = File.join dirname, "#{ '.' if hidden }#{ basename }.#{ ext }"
>> copy_entry s, tmp, true
>> File.rename tmp, d
>> end
>>
>> rescue Errno::EXDEV
>> transfer_entry s, d
>> File.unlink s
>> end
>
> I don't see how this is significantly different. What's the point of
> copying to a tmp file and then renaming the tmp file versus just
> copying directly to the destination?
for applications reading files from the destination dir is is very different! ;-)
consider
process a: mv src dst
process b: cat dst
these two behave very very differently if the 'mv' is really a copy.
if you ask 100 programmers if 'mv' is atomic they will say yes - even though
it is not across fs boundaries, onto nfs, etc. i've seen many, many errors
caused by this. it would be nice if something high level like ruby provided
an abstraction that made the copy seem atomic to openers/readers of the
destination dir.
maybe this is too high level for file-utils, but it's my impression that this
is a high level module - otherwise one would simply use
File.rename 'src', 'dst' rescue File.copy 'src', 'dst'
i think people expect something value added by doing a
require 'fileutils'
kind regards.
-a
--
strong and healthy, who thinks of sickness until it strikes like lightning?
preoccupied with the world, who thinks of death, until it arrives like
thunder? -- milarepa