From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/2980 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rob Landley Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Difficulty emulating F_DUPFD_CLOEXEC Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 18:51:29 -0500 Message-ID: <1364169089.15703.67@driftwood> References: <20130324015923.GA5905@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <514E6082.4070104@eservices.virginia.edu> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; DelSp=Yes; Format=Flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1364169105 25254 80.91.229.3 (24 Mar 2013 23:51:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 23:51:45 +0000 (UTC) Cc: musl@lists.openwall.com To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-2981-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Mon Mar 25 00:52:12 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UJuhv-0002k5-CE for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 25 Mar 2013 00:52:11 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 26476 invoked by uid 550); 24 Mar 2013 23:51:45 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 26468 invoked from network); 24 Mar 2013 23:51:45 -0000 X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:date:from:subject:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:x-mailer :message-id:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition :content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=joZZi9GkRi9BPl9YuMt3rgiS+HCVIbzkpnD5Qcz3Hnk=; b=oZWlxvOvUX5WJ+kZ9Tc677irTmGNnc+EhG0sg+RAropxy1x9dfXmkf0nkfSijPSnb1 keXDKPvfjk5HKV6hxqGcwwGZ5CROWIW3zCTNRpCEBjcmc3lOH+NoKpE6/FuZu+ZLk9mi 1u5G2bQDY1pvC2ODVEU4Cjoscm4BGt4B2IWA49uRzroXadNBAsieTgVyh28hr4gQ6tO2 cTfcwrkEqhsaLnredvV4RGBUdmr+gf2w2+zCQNOb0RqhVEP9wlgUWo3tWdSyMmacDMKo 9+IFxAksZr3Pb3DZlAOsHBp2JHe+He2AsHqKOKEWfruFwQ+tkEmj6HeOEO7Jc9GfmYk9 QP6A== X-Received: by 10.50.11.229 with SMTP id t5mr9918132igb.65.1364169093180; Sun, 24 Mar 2013 16:51:33 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <514E6082.4070104@eservices.virginia.edu> (from zg7s@eservices.virginia.edu on Sat Mar 23 21:10:10 2013) X-Mailer: Balsa 2.4.11 Content-Disposition: inline X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkT9k6JSBpq1kvGBSZGS54Sid8/T88+bUDMMfJleIEz48IRcUGxGAH9g4LQL/Hdjs6OjBEh Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:2980 Archived-At: On 03/23/2013 09:10:10 PM, Zvi Gilboa wrote: > On 03/23/2013 09:59 PM, Rich Felker wrote: >> This uglifies fcntl.c a bit more, but I think it works. Does the =20 >> above >> reasoning make sense? Any other ideas? >=20 > In the hope that this matches the project's spirit... how about =20 > running > these tests during the build, and have a script (or a simple test =20 > program) > #define whether the target architecture supports F_DUPFD_CLOEXEC or =20 > not? > Potentially, this test could be added at the very end of alltypes.h.sh The system you build on and the system you run on aren't always =20 identical. (Especially when you try to build portable static multicall =20 binaries.) Rob=