subject:"O_ACCMODE is wrong"

Re: O_ACCMODE is wrong

2011-03-22 Thread Corinna Vinschen

On Mar 22 11:40, Eric Blake wrote: > First, some background: POSIX 2008 introduced O_SEARCH and O_EXEC, and > states that they may (but not must) share the same bit, since the former > is for directories and the latter for non-directories (cygwin shares > these as 0x40). POSIX states that impl

O_ACCMODE is wrong

2011-03-22 Thread Eric Blake

First, some background: POSIX 2008 introduced O_SEARCH and O_EXEC, and states that they may (but not must) share the same bit, since the former is for directories and the latter for non-directories (cygwin shares these as 0x40). POSIX states that implementations need not reject O_EXEC|O_RDONLY