Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 14:20:15 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Charles Sandmann <sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu>
cc: DJGPP developers <djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>, acottrel AT ihug DOT com DOT au
Subject: Re: Better _open.c, test program
In-Reply-To: <10108160635.AA13428@clio.rice.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010816141659.12766D-100000@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 Thu, 16 Aug 2001, Charles Sandmann wrote:

> _open.c cleaned up a bit.  Testing looks good.  Test program below, use it
> to look at results from _open linked in (plus see what happens on other
> calls using old _open).  Please make comments, then we test?

This looks fine, thanks.

Did you have an opportunity to test whether using SFN open nukes the long 
file name entry from the directory, e.g. if you use O_TRUNC?  I vaguely 
remember something about such side effects of using legacy DOS calls.

Perhaps we should simply add the code to your test program, which would 
use findfirst or stat after the last open, to see whether the file still 
exists under the original long name.