search for: msg00116

> I managed to dig out the original thread for GCC: > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-09/msg00668.html > > It doesn't give a rationale for the case we're discussing, though :/ > > My intuition still tells me that it would be good to separate the > default and globaldynamic cases to > > 1) Respect the user's request: if the user went through the trouble

Hi Rafael, > I kind of agree with the intuition, but If you don't mind I would > probably ask for something stronger before changing the IL. If we do > find a case where for some reason the compiler cannot optimize the > model, adding a 'default' to the IL should be easy. > > Duncan, you know the gcc internals, any thoughts? I don't know anything about TLS

This is the third version of the FUSE bindings for libguestfs. Still, read and write calls don't work, but you can now navigate through the filesystem hierarchy efficiently. Rich. .gitignore | 3 + HACKING | 3 + Makefile.am | 5 + README | 2 + TODO | 37 +-- bindtests | 13 + bootstrap | 2 +

...in commit message Not changed: - Eric commented that spacing was off: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2018-August/msg00113.html but I could not find anything wrong. - Eric asked if ioctl.h will cause grief on BSD compilation: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2018-August/msg00116.html I tested with FreeBSD 11.0 and 10.3 and there is no issue. I also look at NetBSD and OpenBSD source, and in alll ioctl() is defined in ioctl.h. v2 was here: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2018-August/msg00041.html Nir Soffer (4): file: Avoid unsupported fallocate() calls...