Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 13:30:00 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Tim Van Holder <tim DOT van DOT holder AT pandora DOT be>
cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Our unlink() isn't POSIX
In-Reply-To: <992852988.30606.2.camel@bender.falconsoft.be>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010618132911.24334E@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
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


On 18 Jun 2001, Tim Van Holder wrote:

> > But I don't really understand what problem is this close-all code
> > supposed to solve?  Could you elaborate on what does lclint do that
> > forces you to use such techniques?
> 
> It keeps a table of files it has opened; this table has an associated
> cleanup function that unlinks those that need to be removed.  But it
> never seems to close those files (or not all of them anyway), resulting
> in an error in unlink() (on LoseME anyway).
> I've now simply added a call to the stdio_cleanup_proc in those places
> where an _fcloseall() was added on Lose32.

Isn't it cleaner to close each file just before it is unlinked?