On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Julien BLACHE <jb at jblache.org> wrote: > "Simon Matter" <simon.matter at invoca.ch> wrote: > >> 3) from what I understand using mktemp() here is not less secure than what >> scanimage does when writing output files anyway.
True enough, So, instead of using mktemp at all, why not do something like append '.part' to the image name? I think that is a little more clear to the end user if they find some hanging around after a scanimage crash or something. allan -- "The truth is an offense, but not a sin"
