Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 11:15:55 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: "Mark E." <snowball3 AT usa DOT net>
cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: fsext patches for dup and dup2
In-Reply-To: <199904260416.EAA103692@out2.ibm.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.990426111530.15084D-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Mon, 26 Apr 1999, Mark E. wrote:

> From reading this thread, I see much of the same evolution in 
> Randy's proposal as in mine. From DJ's comments in the thread, I 
> would expect that code to have been in djdev 202. Perhaps some 
> more searching will turn up why it didn't happen.

IIRC, DJ requested some more changes in Randy's code, and Randy never
submitted them.

I also recall vaguely that the more we discussed this issue, the more
complications popped up, much like what we begin to uncover now.  But
I forgot the details, and perhaps some of the problems are non-issues
now that we dup the handle inside __FSEXT_alloc_fd instead of opening
the null device.