From: <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
Message-Id: <200303090959.h299xsc05662@speedy.ludd.luth.se>
Subject: Re: lseek code & doc fixes [PATCH]
In-Reply-To: <E18rL9L-0000vc-00@phekda.freeserve.co.uk> "from Richard Dawe at
 Mar 7, 2003 04:59:47 pm"
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2003 10:59:53 +0100 (CET)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL78 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
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 Richard Dawe:
> The recent refactoring of lseek to use llseek seems to have introduced
> a bug. Namely: the error checking checks the wrong variable, to see
> if llseek failed.

Duh! Thanks!


Right,

						MartinS