From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Date: Wed,  1 Mar 2006 16:29:47 +0100
From: "Anselm R. Garbe" <garbeam@gmail.com>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] 9p and how can I know when a write is finished
Message-ID: <20060301152947.GB15178@wmii.de>
References: <20060301151548.GD31173@wmii.de>
	<3427729765b4e88fb0db2d794e3cdbc6@cat-v.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3427729765b4e88fb0db2d794e3cdbc6@cat-v.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 07423a0c-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025


On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 04:20:27PM +0100, uriel@cat-v.org wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 03:29:58PM +0100, Gabriel Diaz wrote:
> >> Twrite tag[2] fid[4] offset[8] count[4] data[count]
> >>
> >> Is there any special mark on those fields? what is
> >> the man page i am missing?
> >
> > As far as I understood, you wait until Tclunk.
> Wrong, the Tclunk is not warranteed to arrive any time soon.
>
> Tclunk != close()

How else do you want to decide? Waiting for a write with count=0
might work by policy, but is not specified (I dunno the
convenience libs of Plan 9), but I answered this as question of
the protocol and not of a specific implementation of convenience
libs. What might work is checking if count < iounit and guessing
that no Twrite will follow...
In the end you are on the safe side when waiting for Tclunk.

Regards,
--
 Anselm R. Garbe  ><><  www.ebrag.de  ><><  GPG key: 0D73F361