From: Martin Str|mberg <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
Message-Id: <200009181709.TAA25929@father.ludd.luth.se>
Subject: Re: O_APPEND
In-Reply-To: <39C62F51.678BEA69@softhome.net> from Laurynas Biveinis at "Sep 18, 2000 05:05:53 pm"
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 19:09:01 +0200 (MET DST)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL54 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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 Laurynas Biveinis:
> > I don't understand this so I don't know if O_APPEND should go beside
> > O_BINARY and O_TEXT or not.
> 
> Is there any reason it shouldn't?

But why the exclusive or? Of course I could just throw it in there and
hope for the best, but I'd prefer to understand the code I change.


Right,

						MartinS