Re: dup2() vs dup3() inconsistency when

[H. Peter Anvin]

Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> -----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.

The result of dup3(fd, fd, O_CLOEXEC) is to set the O_CLOEXEC flag on fd.

The behaviour of dup2() is functionally the following:

1. Duplicate the file descriptor from file_table[oldfd].
2. If file_table[newfd] is in use, close it.
3. Install the duplicate file descriptor at file_table[newfd].

Step (2) could be considered a bit dubious, but the behaviour of 
dup2(fd, fd) is a direct consequence of the chosen semantics.

	-hpa
--
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/