Re: Linux 2.1.125 doesn't dump core on SIGSEGV

Mitchell Blank Jr (mitch@execpc.com)
Fri, 13 Nov 1998 04:48:45 -0600


Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Sounds like the obvious thing is to define an additional O_EXCL_FOLLOW,
> and have straight O_EXCL imply O_NOFOLLOW. It's not orthogonal,

More "orthoginal" would be O_FOLLOW:

switch(mode & (O_FOLLOW|O_NOFOLLOW)) {
case (O_FOLLOW|O_NOFOLLOW): return -EINVAL;
/* ...can't have it both ways */
case 0: mode|=(mode&O_EXCL)?O_NOFOLLOW:O_FOLLOW; }

I'm extremely unconvinced we need this though. Noone has come up with the
pressing need for O_CREAT|O_EXCL|O_FOLLOW that I've seen.

-Mitch

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/