Subject: Re: [PATCH] alternative to sys_indirect, part 1

From: Ulrich Drepper <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 09:04:47 -0700

Alan Cox wrote:
> Believe it or not we have the compute capability between us to not
> accidentally reassign values we assigned to one thing to something else.

Once again, this is not about assigned values.  This is about the time
before you get a value assigned.  Not every experiment out there will
have a value assigned before it starts development.

But it really doesn't matter to me. I'm not the one you would introduce
the problem.  Patch is forthcoming.

>> Oh really?  You open a server socket, use fcntl(FD_CLOEXEC), and then
>> accept(). 
> 
> And your behaviour just became OS specific....

Not according to POSIX.  If some OSes deliberately violate POSIX that's
their problem.  All POSIX OSes will have up to today return a new file
descriptor without the close-on-exec flag set at all times.  Just read
the spec.

- --
➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, CA ❖