On 02/27/2012 05:14 PM, Paul Eggert wrote: > On 02/27/2012 08:10 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote: >> I'm also thinking I should warn once when >> the new lseek fails, but only after the fall back >> write() succeeds. > > I wouldn't bother. Either diagnostic should suffice, > and warning about the lseek would slow the app down > a bit and make it more complicated.
Yep, I meant defer to the write() diagnostic. What I was wondering was whether to warn about the case where the seek fails but the write succeeds like here: dd conv=sparse bs=1 count=10 | ... I'll leave it as advisory for now, and not have a warning for the above case. cheers, Pádraig.
