Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1999 09:28:48 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: "Mark E." <snowball3 AT bigfoot DOT com>
cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: enhancements to fcntl.c
In-Reply-To: <199906020133.BAA158200@out4.ibm.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.990603092802.7269A-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Tue, 1 Jun 1999, Mark E. wrote:

> But when the no-inherit bit is set in the SFT, the child  
> does not inherit the handle.

Sorry, I think I misunderstood the meaning of what you've said.  Does
the above mean that you tried to poke the bits in the SFT, and managed
to get the handle's inherit properties changed accordingly?

If so, it might be a good idea to try the same with the file open
flags, like O_APPEND, O_READONLY etc. (F_SETFL needs that).  It is
probably also worthwhile to post a test program that could test all
these features, so that it could be run in less compatible
environments like NT, DOSEmu etc.  We might need to be able to detect
environments which don't support this and return ENOSYS, or find
alternative ways of doing this (if there are any).