[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Plea for clarification on bz #12724

From: Csaba Henk
Subject: Re: Plea for clarification on bz #12724
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 21:56:28 +0300

On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 7:46 PM, Eric Blake <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 07/28/2011 07:30 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
> This topic came up again in today's Austin Group meeting, reaffirming that
> Solaris behavior is correct and glibc 2.14 behavior, while fixing one aspect
> of fclose, caused an an unintentional regression in another aspect when
> compared to 2.13 behavior:
> That is, fclose() should _not_ call lseek() to the stream position unless
> the stream has done any I/O or fseek() which would qualify as making the
> stream an active handle, such that the stream position has a reason to be
> reflected back into the file description position.

Thanks for the clarification.

I see you also updated the bugzilla entry:

Regarding the Ruby issue, then what they do is OK (still I think ugly
historical cruft).


reply via email to

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