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

Reply via email to