From: Martin Str|mberg <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
Message-Id: <200011272244.XAA13566@father.ludd.luth.se>
Subject: Re: Locking fcntl() and flock() patches
In-Reply-To: <3A2232C2.2752.12CA0D@localhost> from "Mark E." at "Nov 27, 2000 10:09:06 am"
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 23:44:58 +0100 (MET)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL54 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

According to Mark E.:
> > > +    case F_SETLKW:
> > > +    {
> > > +      struct flock *lock_req = NULL; /* shut up -Wall */
> > > +      int ret = -1;
> > > +      off_t pos, cur_pos, lock_pos;
> > > +      off_t len;
> 
> When I came up with this part, the FAT32 support was not yet in. So it's my 
> mistake that offset_t and llseek wasn't used here.

Huh?! How can that be a mistake unless you live in reverse-time?

(Your humbleness is commendable. However I don't think we're trying to
point any fingers here; we're just giving feedback. Personally, I
don't care who made the bugs/mistakes; I care that the bugs/mistakes
are corrected.)


Right,

						MartinS