This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.cygnus.com
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [David Madore <madore@quatramaran.ens.fr>] libc/1638: O_NOLINK documented but not implemented
- To: libc-alpha Mailinglist <libc-alpha at sourceware dot cygnus dot com>
- Subject: Re: [David Madore <madore@quatramaran.ens.fr>] libc/1638: O_NOLINK documented but not implemented
- From: James Antill <james at and dot org>
- Date: 08 Mar 2000 11:03:49 -0500
- Cc: Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot de>, David Madore <madore at quatramaran dot ens dot fr>
- References: <u8put5x3xz.fsf@gromit.rhein-neckar.de>
- Reply-To: <james at and dot org>
Andreas Jaeger <aj@suse.de> writes:
> [1 <text/plain>]
>
> Hi glibc folks,
>
> we received the appended bug report - and it's not the first time that
> a sentence like:
> "The following three file name translation flags exist only in the GNU system."
>
> caused confusion. The glibc manual means here really the Hurd. I'd
> like to change this and other occurences of "GNU system" to a phrase
> which doesn't cause os much confusion and bug reports.
Well from the info explanation O_NOLINK == O_NOFOLLOW in Linux, so
glibc should probably define both (or maybe hurd could just change to
O_NOFOLLOW ?).
As far as I know, _IGNORE_CTTY and _NOTRANS aren't implemented in
Linux though.
--
James Antill -- james@and.org
"If we can't keep this sort of thing out of the kernel, we might as well
pack it up and go run Solaris." -- Larry McVoy,
Talking about adding DSM into Linux.