From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: lseek(2) BSD buglet Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 05:48:40 -0400 Message-ID: <20100814094840.GA6217@infradead.org> References: <201008111813.OAA03192@Sparkle.Rodents-Montreal.ORG> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201008111813.OAA03192-23rEAq0nvmRBjDB12xDq2QQ+uF9fDdDi0Z6qq+Mcf0E@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-man-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: der Mouse Cc: mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, linux-man-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-man@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 02:13:35PM -0400, der Mouse wrote: > lseek(2) (noticed on 3.23, 3.25 has similar wording) says, in part, > > SVr1-3 returns long instead of off_t, BSD returns int. > > While the BSDs are not a single monolithic entity, NetBSD has returned > off_t from lseek(2) since 1.5 at the very latest, meaning late 2000. > I'd be surprised if there's a non-orphaned BSD left that still uses > int. > > I'm not sure what wording would be best. Depends on whether you think > it's worth mentioning the historical practice from the days when BSD > deserved the B in its name or not, I'd say. Perhaps something like I think removing it is fine. Historical SysV and BSD behaviour might have been interesting in the early 90s, but these days it's something for a history book and not a manual page. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html