https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83625
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|--- |6.5 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Andrew Gunnerson from comment #0) > This could cause the function to report an error if the path is deleted > between the stat() and remove() instead of returning false. Would it make > sense to always attempt remove() and return false if errno == ENOENT instead? This was done as part of PR 83626