[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Openat without die

From: Bastien ROUCARIES
Subject: Re: Openat without die
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 14:45:29 +0100
User-agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.36-trunk-amd64; KDE/4.4.5; x86_64; ; )

Le mardi 11 janvier 2011 14:21:59, Jim Meyering a écrit :
> Bastien ROUCARIES wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > This two patches will allow to remove a xmalloc and bail out early in
> > case of ENOMEM
> > 
> > I plan to implement a API reusing openat_permissive()
> > 
> > If openat_permissive cwd_errno is NULL use the slow but safe fork variant
> > else use the fchdir variant
> > 
> > Program that care could therefore use the more permissive variant
> > (like for instance the critical fts without FTS_NOCHDIR)
> Hi Bastien,
> Before embarking on changes to (or duplication of) infrastructure like
> the *at functions, please tell us about your motivation.  Why do you care
> about whether openat may abort under unusual circumstances --- and only
> on systems that are old enough that they can be challenging portability
> targets?  As I tried to explain, there does not seem to be a clean way
> to solve the problem, and besides, the target systems that would benefit
> from this portability improvement are mostly old and dying: not supporting
> POSIX-mandated *at functions is a good sign that they are not evolving.

I plan to use openat and fts for scientific computing on old and new plateforms.
I care about these strange plateform and I do not want my code abort (I could 
lost computation and saving before is pretty slow).


> > I program also to implement *at_permissive function
> > 
> > What do you think about that?

reply via email to

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