Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
From:	Corinna Vinschen <vinschen AT redhat DOT com>
Date:	Tue, 19 Dec 2000 10:47:46 +0100
X-Mailer:	KMail [version 1.1.99]
To:	cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	RFD: remove(3)
Reply-To:	cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
MIME-Version:	1.0
Message-Id:	<00121910474600.28008@cygbert>
X-MIME-Autoconverted:	from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id EAA12563

The remove(3) call in newlib is implemented as a simple call to unlink(2).

SUSv2/Linux/OpenBSD on the other hand define remove(3) as follows:

  If path does not name a directory, remove(path) is equivalent to unlink(path). 
  If path names a directory, remove(path) is equivalent to rmdir(path).

I would plead to implement our own remove(3) call, overriding the newlib
implementation. AFAICS, we can't change the newlib implementation because
newlib doesn't know of rmdir(2) at all.

Thoughts?

Corinna

- Raw text -