From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Apr 14 14:59:50 2008
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F502106564A
	for <arch@freebsd.org>; Mon, 14 Apr 2008 14:59:50 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk)
Received: from phk.freebsd.dk (phk.freebsd.dk [130.225.244.222])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23E7D8FC13
	for <arch@freebsd.org>; Mon, 14 Apr 2008 14:59:49 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (unknown [192.168.61.3])
	by phk.freebsd.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id B49CA17107;
	Mon, 14 Apr 2008 14:59:48 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by critter.freebsd.dk (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m3EExmd4093247;
	Mon, 14 Apr 2008 14:59:48 GMT (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk)
To: Ed Schouten <ed@80386.nl>
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 14 Apr 2008 16:52:31 +0200."
	<20080414145231.GJ5934@hoeg.nl> 
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2008 14:59:48 +0000
Message-ID: <93246.1208185188@critter.freebsd.dk>
Sender: phk@critter.freebsd.dk
Cc: arch@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: f_offset 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2008 14:59:50 -0000

In message <20080414145231.GJ5934@hoeg.nl>, Ed Schouten writes:

>It's all so confusing that the standards seem to change then. When I
>take a look at the POSIX onlinepubs, the articles seem to mention the
>opposite:
>
>http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/read.html
>
>	"The behavior of multiple concurrent reads on the same pipe,
>	FIFO, or terminal device is unspecified."
>
>http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/write.html
>
>	"This volume of IEEE Std 1003.1-2001 does not specify behavior
>	of concurrent writes to a file from multiple processes.
>	Applications should use some form of concurrency control."

Remember that POSIX was written so both MVS and Windows could comply,
UNIX may have and need higher standards.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.