Thread

1. Use of access(X_OK) check in pg_upgrade

   Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> — 2011-05-18T15:41:51Z

   I broke the Win32 build members by using access(X_OK) in pg_upgrade.  I
   have a fix for this but looking at pg_upgrade's exec.c, I see for
   Win32:
   
   	    if ((buf.st_mode & S_IXUSR) == 0)
   
   I am confused why Windows supports S_IXUSR but not X_OK.
   
   -- 
     Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
     EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com
   
     + It's impossible for everything to be true. +
   
   

2. Re: Use of access(X_OK) check in pg_upgrade

   Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> — 2011-05-18T16:12:48Z

   On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 11:41, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
   > I broke the Win32 build members by using access(X_OK) in pg_upgrade.  I
   > have a fix for this but looking at pg_upgrade's exec.c, I see for
   > Win32:
   >
   >            if ((buf.st_mode & S_IXUSR) == 0)
   >
   > I am confused why Windows supports S_IXUSR but not X_OK.
   
   It doesn't natively - we define it in port/win32.h
   
   -- 
    Magnus Hagander
    Me: http://www.hagander.net/
    Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
   
   

3. Re: Use of access(X_OK) check in pg_upgrade

   Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> — 2011-05-18T16:13:58Z

   Bruce Momjian wrote:
   > I broke the Win32 build members by using access(X_OK) in pg_upgrade.  I
   > have a fix for this but looking at pg_upgrade's exec.c, I see for
   > Win32:
   > 
   > 	    if ((buf.st_mode & S_IXUSR) == 0)
   > 
   > I am confused why Windows supports S_IXUSR but not X_OK.
   
   I have applied the attached patch to fix this.
   
   -- 
     Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
     EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com
   
     + It's impossible for everything to be true. +
   

4. Re: Use of access(X_OK) check in pg_upgrade

   Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> — 2011-05-18T16:16:18Z

   Magnus Hagander wrote:
   > On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 11:41, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
   > > I broke the Win32 build members by using access(X_OK) in pg_upgrade. ?I
   > > have a fix for this but looking at pg_upgrade's exec.c, I see for
   > > Win32:
   > >
   > > ? ? ? ? ? ?if ((buf.st_mode & S_IXUSR) == 0)
   > >
   > > I am confused why Windows supports S_IXUSR but not X_OK.
   > 
   > It doesn't natively - we define it in port/win32.h
   
   Sure, but that is defined as _S_IEXEC:
   
           #define S_IXUSR _S_IEXEC
           #define S_IRWXU (S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR | S_IXUSR)
   
   So what is _S_IEXEC.  Anyway, execute permission means something
   different on Win32 for directories so I have a fix applied.
   
   -- 
     Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
     EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com
   
     + It's impossible for everything to be true. +
   
   

5. Re: Use of access(X_OK) check in pg_upgrade

   Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> — 2011-05-18T16:18:37Z

   On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 12:16, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
   > Magnus Hagander wrote:
   >> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 11:41, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
   >> > I broke the Win32 build members by using access(X_OK) in pg_upgrade. ?I
   >> > have a fix for this but looking at pg_upgrade's exec.c, I see for
   >> > Win32:
   >> >
   >> > ? ? ? ? ? ?if ((buf.st_mode & S_IXUSR) == 0)
   >> >
   >> > I am confused why Windows supports S_IXUSR but not X_OK.
   >>
   >> It doesn't natively - we define it in port/win32.h
   >
   > Sure, but that is defined as _S_IEXEC:
   >
   >        #define S_IXUSR _S_IEXEC
   >        #define S_IRWXU (S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR | S_IXUSR)
   >
   > So what is _S_IEXEC.  Anyway, execute permission means something
   > different on Win32 for directories so I have a fix applied.
   
   I'm pretty sure it's mapped to read permissions internally in the API headers.
   
   -- 
    Magnus Hagander
    Me: http://www.hagander.net/
    Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/