On Fri, 2018-03-23 at 11:49 -0500, Seebs wrote: > On Fri, 23 Mar 2018 16:30:55 +0000 > "Burton, Ross" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Because in GNU's infinite wisdom they're using renameat2() to do > > atomic renames in the mv command, and as renameat2 isn't in the > > headers for F27 it just does a syscall directly. This is in > > upstream > > coreutils so once they make a release, everyone gets it. > UGH. > > I... am really unsure whether it's possible to catch that, because > I really, really, don't want to try to intercept raw syscall() calls. > I don't think that ends well.
Just out of interest for my education, why is that a really bad idea? Loops, e.g. with memory allocation issues? Cheers, Richard -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
