[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150629160535.GR1173@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2015 12:05:35 -0400
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: fseek EOVERFLOW
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 05:31:27PM +0200, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> the kernel side should fix this.. unless they consider
> /dev/zero a special device where netative offset is valid,
> and work correctly on regular files.
>
> if lseek is conforming then i think fseek would work too.
I missed that it was operating on /dev/zero. I suspect the kernel
considers all offsets (negative and positive) valid for /dev/zero.
Obviously this makes the return value of the lseek syscall ambiguous
(is it an error value or a small negative number?) so I think, if this
is the case, it's a bug that should be fixed on the kernel side.
Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
