Paul Eggert wrote:
Matthew Woehlke writes:
Ack, I must apologize for giving wrong information. What I meant to
say is that there is no /sync/ (oddly enough, there is fsync on
NSK). So building 'sync' is silly
Not really. Shell scripts use 'sync'. Even if it's a noop
it's nice to have.
Ok. Is it possible to change the man page to indicate this? Um... I
guess it should be, since coreutils uses help2man; change sync.c so that
it /really/ is a no-op (and identifies itself as such) if the system
has no sync()? (I suppose a better question is if the info doc can also
be made dynamic...?)
Google code says several other programs test for HAVE_FSYNC (e.g.,
glimpse, ruby) so I still think the patch is reasonable, even though I
don't know which systems lack fsync.
Agreed, the same thought occurred to me.
--
Matthew
Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature, please!
_______________________________________________
Bug-coreutils mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
