Hi, <to...@tuxteam.de> skribis:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 06:39:47PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote: >> Hello! > > [...] > >> Furthermore, AFAICS, the above logic is redundant with what the kernel >> does anyway. That is, in a single-threaded program, >> >> mask = umask (0); >> umask (mask); >> mkdir (file, 0777 ^ mask); >> >> is equivalent to: >> >> mkdir (file, 0777); >> >> Am I right that we should just remove these two ‘umask’ calls? > > According to umask(2), yes, you are right. Unless someone has been > trying to work around some platform-specific bug/idiosyncracy. I don’t think there was ever a good reason for this. Fixed in 245608911698adb3472803856019bdd5670b6614. Thanks for your feedback, Ludo’.
