Re: dup2() vs dup3() inconsistency when

[Ulrich Drepper]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> The dup2() behavior comes from the logical consequence of dup2()'s
> "close on reuse"; one would think it would be logical for dup3() to
> behave the same way.

No.  We deliberately decided on this change.  Otherwise, what is the
result of dup3(fd, fd, O_CLOEXEC)?  There is no reason to use
dup2(fd,fd), so why the hell somebody wants to defend this is beyond me.

- --
â Ulrich Drepper â Red Hat, Inc. â 444 Castro St â Mountain View, CA â
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkjuaisACgkQ2ijCOnn/RHRBBgCeMtzyHtpv7jt5a2XxIq9LEoDN
ZVYAnixMwtW6d6SL55MvrKwV/B5Yv1Cm
=MCqO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/