Re: [PATCH] nextfd(2)

["H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>]

On 04/04/2012 09:31 AM, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
>>
>> OK, so what you're saying here is:
>>
>> Linux doesn't actually have a problem unless:
>> 1. You use the library implementation of opendir/readdir/closedir;
>> 2. You use a nonstandard malloc for the platform which doesn't
>>     correctly set up fork hooks (which I would consider a bug);
> 
> Right. but I'm argue "correctly set up" term because SUS/POSIX don't
> require it.
> It is only a workaround of buggy userland in glibc. SUS still says you
> can't
> use opendir and typical userland people don't want ignore SUS as far as
> possible.

Since you are comparing with a Linux-only system call, any suggestion
that depends on SuS requirements as opposed to Linux requirements is
irrelevant.

> 
> It can. but more ugly. no?
> 

And a new system call isn't?  What planet are you on?

	-hpa