From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <af3d20ce-0b0c-45c5-b657-6ac5910ad865@googlegroups.com>
References: <af3d20ce-0b0c-45c5-b657-6ac5910ad865@googlegroups.com>
Date: Wed,  5 Dec 2012 11:01:19 +0000
Message-ID: <CAOw7k5h1PPpjqP+KJWC+zbdOZ2OPhWe=aG-SEdV9cfSC+5pPrQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Charles Forsyth <charles.forsyth@gmail.com>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [9fans] QTEXCL/DMEXCL redundancy
Topicbox-Message-UUID: f0718722-ead7-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

The qid.type is defined to be the top 8 bits of the mode.
See the end of intro(5) and the discussion in stat(5).

On 5 December 2012 09:41, Pavel Klinkovsky <pavel.klinkovsky@gmail.com> wrote:
> I really do not understand why such a redundancy (QTEXCL/qid and DMEXCL/mode) is there...