On Dec 10 17:27, Zefram wrote:
> Providing a faked openat(2) is far worse than providing no openat(2)
> at all. As long as these functions cannot be implemented in a way that
> exhibits the distinctive behaviour of the real thing, they should either
> be unavailable at compile time or consistently
Cygwin offers openat(2) et al functions, which superficially appear
to work, but actually they're fake implementations that use absolute
pathnames underneath. This means that they fail in ways that real
openat(2) et al cannot fail, as soon as any relevant renaming occurs.
This misleads programs in
2 matches
Mail list logo
