[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:
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12724#c2
Regarding the Ruby issue, then what they do is OK (still I think ugly
historical cruft).
Csaba