From: Martin Str|mberg <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
Message-Id: <200101031701.SAA03524@father.ludd.luth.se>
Subject: Re: Bug 000323 (LONG)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010103185010.4647H-100000@is> from Eli Zaretskii at "Jan 3, 2001 06:51:53 pm"
To: eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il (Eli Zaretskii)
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 18:01:05 +0100 (MET)
Cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com (DJGPP-WORKERS)
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 Eli Zaretskii:
> 
> On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, Martin Str|mberg wrote:
> 
> > According to Eli Zaretskii:
> > > _All_ output from buffered stdio functions goes through _flsbuf.  In the 
> > > unbuffered case, _flsbuf is called for each character.
> > 
> > Yes, but how about unbuffered output. Perhaps write() isn't buffering?
> 
> My comment was specifically about calls to fseek you added to each 
> buffered stdio function.  `write' is not one of those functions, and 
> fseek will not work for it.  So I wasn't talking about `write' and 
> friends.

Oh! I see. So I put the seek in _flsbuf() and not in any buffered
stdio functions. Plus seek in unbuffered functions.


Right,

						MartinS