Add F_RDLCK/F_WRLCK/F_UNLCK to several platforms #1118
Conversation
These are used by the flock wrapper in rustc_data_structures. The constants were already present in x86_64-linux-gnu and BSD (since 4928bd9).
|
Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @alexcrichton (or someone else) soon. If any changes to this PR are deemed necessary, please add them as extra commits. This ensures that the reviewer can see what has changed since they last reviewed the code. Due to the way GitHub handles out-of-date commits, this should also make it reasonably obvious what issues have or haven't been addressed. Large or tricky changes may require several passes of review and changes. Please see the contribution instructions for more information. |
|
r? @gnzlbg |
|
@bors: r+ |
|
@gnzlbg: 🔑 Insufficient privileges: Not in reviewers |
|
The failure is spurious. I've restarted the |
|
@smaeul thank you for the PR. Currently -- @alexcrichton it seems that i'm still not in reviewers |
|
@gnzlbg try again now? |
|
@bors: r+ |
|
📌 Commit 1b130d4 has been approved by |
Add F_RDLCK/F_WRLCK/F_UNLCK to several platforms These are used by the flock wrapper in rustc_data_structures. The constants were already present in x86_64-linux-gnu and BSD (since 4928bd9). Currently the `flock` wrapper in `rustc_data_structures` does not work on several 32-bit musl targets, because they expect the `LARGEFILE64` version of the `F_SETLK`/`F_SETLKW` constants. This PR is a prerequisite to converting that code to use the `libc` types and constants, instead of (inaccurately) duplicating them, since `libc` already provides architecture-specific definitions of the relevant constants.
|
💔 Test failed - status-travis |
|
@bors: retry |
Add F_RDLCK/F_WRLCK/F_UNLCK to several platforms These are used by the flock wrapper in rustc_data_structures. The constants were already present in x86_64-linux-gnu and BSD (since 4928bd9). Currently the `flock` wrapper in `rustc_data_structures` does not work on several 32-bit musl targets, because they expect the `LARGEFILE64` version of the `F_SETLK`/`F_SETLKW` constants. This PR is a prerequisite to converting that code to use the `libc` types and constants, instead of (inaccurately) duplicating them, since `libc` already provides architecture-specific definitions of the relevant constants.
|
💥 Test timed out |
|
@bors: retry |
Add F_RDLCK/F_WRLCK/F_UNLCK to several platforms These are used by the flock wrapper in rustc_data_structures. The constants were already present in x86_64-linux-gnu and BSD (since 4928bd9). Currently the `flock` wrapper in `rustc_data_structures` does not work on several 32-bit musl targets, because they expect the `LARGEFILE64` version of the `F_SETLK`/`F_SETLKW` constants. This PR is a prerequisite to converting that code to use the `libc` types and constants, instead of (inaccurately) duplicating them, since `libc` already provides architecture-specific definitions of the relevant constants.
|
💔 Test failed - status-travis |
|
@bors: retry |
Add F_RDLCK/F_WRLCK/F_UNLCK to several platforms These are used by the flock wrapper in rustc_data_structures. The constants were already present in x86_64-linux-gnu and BSD (since 4928bd9). Currently the `flock` wrapper in `rustc_data_structures` does not work on several 32-bit musl targets, because they expect the `LARGEFILE64` version of the `F_SETLK`/`F_SETLKW` constants. This PR is a prerequisite to converting that code to use the `libc` types and constants, instead of (inaccurately) duplicating them, since `libc` already provides architecture-specific definitions of the relevant constants.
|
💥 Test timed out |
|
@bors: retry |
Add F_RDLCK/F_WRLCK/F_UNLCK to several platforms These are used by the flock wrapper in rustc_data_structures. The constants were already present in x86_64-linux-gnu and BSD (since 4928bd9). Currently the `flock` wrapper in `rustc_data_structures` does not work on several 32-bit musl targets, because they expect the `LARGEFILE64` version of the `F_SETLK`/`F_SETLKW` constants. This PR is a prerequisite to converting that code to use the `libc` types and constants, instead of (inaccurately) duplicating them, since `libc` already provides architecture-specific definitions of the relevant constants.
|
☀️ Test successful - status-appveyor, status-travis |
These are used by the flock wrapper in rustc_data_structures. The constants were already present in x86_64-linux-gnu and BSD (since 4928bd9).
Currently the
flockwrapper inrustc_data_structuresdoes not work on several 32-bit musl targets, because they expect theLARGEFILE64version of theF_SETLK/F_SETLKWconstants. This PR is a prerequisite to converting that code to use thelibctypes and constants, instead of (inaccurately) duplicating them, sincelibcalready provides architecture-specific definitions of the relevant constants.