Re: [PATCH] Drop O_LARGEFILE from F_GETFL for POSIX compliance

[Ulrich Drepper]

Andi Kleen wrote:

> No, because O_LARGEFILE is not part of POSIX :-) (they use open64 etc.)

What are you talking about?  Neither O_LARGEFILE nor open64 is in POSIX.
 But both are in the LFS extensions.

This whole change seems dubious at best.  Who has argued that
O_LARGEFILE mustn't be returned?  I do not agree at all.  If the test
suite checks this the author must defend the position.

I suggest to not make any changes.  It is perfectly OK to define new O_
flags and the open() specification does not require that none of them
must set implicitly.


-- 
â Ulrich Drepper â Red Hat, Inc. â 444 Castro St â Mountain View, CA â
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/