![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Wed 2006-06-28 16:47:00, Ulrich Drepper wrote: > On 6/28/06, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote: > >mmap() behaviour always was platform-specific, and it happens to be > >quite strange on i386. So what. > > Nonsense. The mmap semantics is specified in POSIX. If something > doesn't work as requested it is a bug. For the specific issue hurting > x86 and likely others the standard explicitly allows requiring > PROT_READ to be used or implicitly adding it. Don't confuse people > with wrong statement like yours. Can you quote part of POSIX where it says that PROT_WRITE must imply PROT_READ? Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html - 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/ | ||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-06-29 09:33 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||