[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gaëtan LEURENT) writes: > David Kastrup wrote on 24 Jun 2005 23:01:50 +0200: > >> I fail to see the advantage of using chown, or using fopen and >> fchown. In both cases the file name can be changed to refer to >> something else before the operation starts. >> >> The only situation where fchown offers any advantage is where you >> _already_ have a file open, like when you write the file after fopen, >> and then change its permissions. > > Yes, that is true. But we are exactly in the situation were fchown is > useful.
I saw the detailed description afterwards. You are right. fchown would be desirable to use where available. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel
