Re: [Patch] autoconf.sh - no FD + chmod at right time

[Akim Demaille]

>>>>> "Tim" == Tim Van Holder <address@hidden> writes:

>> > Using a file instead of an FD avoids problems with running >
>> autoconf from autoupdate on DOS (where FD 4, 7, 8 and 9 > are
>> reserved by Perl).
>> 
>> Why don't you use another FD instead of using a tmp file?

Tim> Which one? I tried 3, 5 and 6 as well; they gave the same errors.

Can't we go higher?

Tim> Unless using a temp file is less portable, I don't see a problem
Tim> with that.

I wouldn't be surprised that for instance you broke -o for traces.
The use of FD was carefully crafted to avoid using tmp files, and to
factor most of the code.