Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 11 Jun 2002 17:49:51 +0100 | From | Jamie Lokier <> | Subject | Re: [patch] fat/msdos/vfat crud removal |
| |
Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Actually by now most applications have been fixed and do not use > them. The policy has been in place for several years now.
I like this policy and understand how to use it, except...
Once upon a time I wrote a program which used O_NOFOLLOW, before Glibc had support for that flag.
It had to read the kernel headers, as this macro is an architecture-dependent flag, and I did not want to write a program that was so non-portable it would only compile on some architectures.
Even if I'd copied all the definitions for all architectures out of the kernel, that wouldn't do: the program wouldn't compile on architectures added later, or ones that aren't part of the standard distribution.
So to keep the program relatively portable, it searched for definitions of O_NOFOLLOW in the kernel headers. (It was a Glibc/kernel conflict nightmare).
Please can you suggest how I should write this sort of code, the next time it occurs?
thanks, -- Jamie - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |