autoconf
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Helping us


From: Tim Van Holder
Subject: Re: Helping us
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 22:17:04 +0200

> - Fill the functions zoo in the documentation (an empty @table for the
>   time being).
>
Is this what you're looking for ("Function Portability" seemed like
better English - but I'm only a stupid Belgian, so what do I know? :-) ).

Index: autoconf.texi
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/autoconf/doc/autoconf.texi,v
retrieving revision 1.471
diff -u -u -r1.471 autoconf.texi
--- autoconf.texi       2001/06/18 19:11:24     1.471
+++ autoconf.texi       2001/06/18 20:14:13
@@ -235,7 +235,7 @@

 Library Functions

-* Functions Portability::       Pitfalls with usual functions
+* Function Portability::        Pitfalls with usual functions
 * Particular Functions::        Special handling to find certain functions
 * Generic Functions::           How to find other functions

@@ -3169,12 +3169,12 @@
 it, then you can use one of the general function-check macros.

 @menu
-* Functions Portability::       Pitfalls with usual functions
+* Function Portability::        Pitfalls with usual functions
 * Particular Functions::        Special handling to find certain functions
 * Generic Functions::           How to find other functions
 @end menu

address@hidden Functions Portability, Particular Functions, Library Functions,
Library Functions
address@hidden Function Portability, Particular Functions, Library Functions,
Library Functions
 @subsection Portability of Classical Functions

 Most usual functions can either be missing, or be buggy, or be limited
@@ -3184,10 +3184,19 @@

 @table @code

address@hidden unlink
+The @sc{posix} spec says that @code{unlink} causes the given file to be
+removed only after there are no more open file handles for it.  Not all
+OS's support this behaviour though.  So even on systems that provide
address@hidden, you cannot portably assume it is OK to call it on files
+that are open.  For example, on Windows 9x and ME, such a call would simply
+fail (with EACCESS), but on DOS it could even lead to file system
corruption,
+as the file might end up being written to after the OS has removed it.
+
 @end table


address@hidden Particular Functions, Generic Functions, Functions Portability,
Library Functions
address@hidden Particular Functions, Generic Functions, Function Portability,
Library Functions
 @subsection Particular Function Checks
 @cindex Function, checking





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]