Re: [PATCH v4 4/4] t0060: verify that basename() and dirname() work as expected
- From
Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com>
- Date
- Jan 13, 2016, 16:46 UTC
- Message-ID
- <56967F7B.8080407@ramsayjones.plus.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <alpine.DEB.2.20.1601131022410.2964@virtualbox>
On 13/01/16 09:27, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
Show 19 quoted lines
> Hi Torsten,
>
> On Wed, 13 Jan 2016, Torsten Bögershausen wrote:
>
>> On 01/12/2016 08:57 AM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>>
>>> +static struct test_data basename_data[] = {
>>> + /* --- POSIX type paths --- */
>>> + { NULL, "." },
>>> + { "", "." },
>>> + { ".", "." },
>>> + { "..", ".." },
>>> + { "/", "/" },
>>> +#if defined(__CYGWIN__) && !defined(NO_LIBGEN_H)
>> Why the !defined(NO_LIBGEN_H)
>>
>> Shouldn't CYGWIN always behave the same ?
>
> One would assume... Alas, it does not.Err, ... yes it does! :-P
> > I inherited the code in question and wondered the same. I opted for > keeping the code as a documentation of the differing behavior.
Exactly.
ATB, Ramsay Jones