Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 21:49:07 +0300
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: Martin Str|mberg <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
Message-Id: <2593-Mon04Jun2001214907+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-Mailer: Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.3.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
CC: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <200106041203.OAA11068@mother.ludd.luth.se> (message from Martin
	Str|mberg on Mon, 4 Jun 2001 14:03:56 +0200 (MEST))
Subject: Re: file append problem
References:  <200106041203 DOT OAA11068 AT mother DOT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
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

> From: Martin Str|mberg <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
> Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 14:03:56 +0200 (MEST)
> 
> According to Mark E.:
> > I see two solutions:
> > 1) Have _flsbuf (and other places where _IOAPPEND is checked) check whether 
> > the underlying fd has its append flag set before calling _write.
> > 2) Add logic to _write to check whether a file descriptor's append flag is 
> > set and take action.
> 
> Perhaps there's a third. In dup2 make sure the append flags are in sync?

If I understand correctly the analysis Mark presented, the problem is
that we have two flags, where we should have had one.  Since we now
have a way to store attributes for handles, we should dump the
_IOAPPEND flag in the FILE object and instead use the append flag of
the underlying file handle when it is written to.

Having two flags for the same functionality just looks for trouble,
IMHO.