> > actually it's an unusual condition (I don't recall many other applications 
> > that have to circumvent broken umask's). 
>  
> I don't call it broken - it's just unexpected.  A program that fails 
> in obscure ways when faced with unexpected input is broken. 

whatever.

you already made your point, I thought, and when I get back to lynx patches,
I'll modify it to accommodate that (unless there's a patch to integrate).
Moving the logic for the temporary directory down a level to invoke it
on demand (and repairing the umask as needed) is the better solution.
  
>   Klaus 

-- 
Thomas E. Dickey  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://dickey.his.com
ftp://dickey.his.com

; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to