Re: openat problems on decent linux systems

[Jim Meyering]

Paul Eggert <address@hidden> wrote:
> How about the following patch instead?  It seems a bit more
> straightforward.  However, I don't fully understand the problem so I
> may well have gotten it wrong.
>
> 2006-12-11  Paul Eggert  <address@hidden>
>
>       * m4/openat.m4 (gl_FUNC_OPENAT): Don't compile mkdirat
>       and fchmodat unconditionally, since glibc 2.4 has them.
>       Problem reported by Arkadiusz Miskiewicz.
>
> --- m4/openat.m4      20 Nov 2006 22:01:30 -0000      1.9
> +++ m4/openat.m4      12 Dec 2006 06:12:43 -0000
> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> -#serial 11
> +#serial 12
>  # See if we need to use our replacement for Solaris' openat et al functions.
>
>  dnl Copyright (C) 2004, 2005, 2006 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> @@ -10,16 +10,12 @@ dnl with or without modifications, as lo
>
>  AC_DEFUN([gl_FUNC_OPENAT],
>  [
> -  # No system provides these functions; compile them unconditionally.
> -  AC_LIBOBJ([mkdirat])
> -  AC_LIBOBJ([fchmodat])

That looks fine to me.
Good to remove that comment and code, now that Linux and glibc
support these functions.  Back when I wrote that, I had little
expectation that the kernel (POSIX even) would be changed.

Thanks, Paul.