Re: Some non-standard O_* flags are missing

Heya :) On Tue 09 Mar 2021 22:47, Maxime Devos writes: > On Tue, 2021-03-09 at 21:36 +0100, Andy Wingo wrote: >> Hi :) Sure, would be happy to accept a patch for these. > See > and messages above. I'll look at updating NEWS and the manual

Re: Some non-standard O_* flags are missing

On Tue, 2021-03-09 at 21:36 +0100, Andy Wingo wrote: > Hi :) Sure, would be happy to accept a patch for these. See and messages above. I'll look at updating NEWS and the manual later. > It's adding > more definitions to the base

Re: Some non-standard O_* flags are missing

Hi :) Sure, would be happy to accept a patch for these. It's adding more definitions to the base environment, which is usually a negative, but we'll have to find some kind of module solution for all of these flags at some point. If you do send a patch, please update the manual and NEWS also.

Some non-standard O_* flags are missing

Hi guilers, I noticed the following open flags are not defined: O_NOFOLLOW, O_TMPFILE, O_IGNORE_CTTY, O_NOLINK, O_SHLOCK, O_EXLOCK, O_ASYNC, O_NOATIME. Some of these are Hurd-specific, Linux-specific and BSD-specific. I'm particularily interested in O_NOFOLLOW, O_TMPFILE, O_IGNORE_CTTY,