On 08/24/2009 11:29 AM, Bruno Haible wrote:
Eric Blake wrote:
For that matter, proposing an O_SAFER to the glibc folks might be worthwhile.
Yes, but better call it O_NONSTD
O_NOSTDFD?
If glibc or the kernel goes into this direction, it would be cool.
Whether gnulib should define this O_SAFER, I'm not sure. We get
some problem with unistd--.h and fcntl--.h: How do we define open()
such that
open (s, f [, m]) ::= open (s, f | O_SAFER [, m])
That becomes a bit hairy.
... what about creat, too?
Paolo
