On Mon, Mar 24, 2003 at 10:29:32AM -0500, Ray Butterworth wrote:
> Note that I wasn't claiming it was portable,
> just that a similar mechanism (e.g. "iob[]", "_iob[]", or "__iob[]")
> exists in all the UNIX versions I've seen over the last 20+ years
> except for in LINUX. And it's not only the Sy
> From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Mar 21 16:04:58 2003
> On Thu, Mar 20, 2003 at 09:07:39PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Walter Tautz wrote:
> > > please retain the CC to rbutterworth
> > >
> > >
> > > Subject: Linux stdio question.
> > >
> > > On non-linux unix systems, one can reference __
On Fri, Mar 21, 2003 at 03:03:33PM -0600, Michael Heironimus wrote:
> Well, __iob is reasonably portable because it looks like it's a standard
> part of a System V libc. In theory, I think glibc is supposed to support
> the System V ABI, but it doesn't seem to have an __iob[]. I don't think
> __io
On Thu, Mar 20, 2003 at 09:07:39PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
> Walter Tautz wrote:
> > please retain the CC to rbutterworth
> >
> >
> > Subject: Linux stdio question.
> >
> > On non-linux unix systems, one can reference __iob[]
> > to find all currently fopen()ed files
> > (e.g. when forking a new
Walter Tautz wrote:
> please retain the CC to rbutterworth
>
>
> Subject: Linux stdio question.
>
> On non-linux unix systems, one can reference __iob[]
> to find all currently fopen()ed files
> (e.g. when forking a new process one would generally
> want to flush their buffers first, or perhaps
On Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 01:32:26PM -0500, Walter Tautz wrote:
> please retain the CC to rbutterworth
>
>
> Subject: Linux stdio question.
>
> On non-linux unix systems, one can reference __iob[]
> to find all currently fopen()ed files
> (e.g. when forking a new process one would generally
> wan
6 matches
Mail list logo
