From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Jan 14 13:38:01 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id NAA09835 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 14 Jan 1997 13:38:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP id NAA09830 for ; Tue, 14 Jan 1997 13:37:59 -0800 (PST) Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id OAA01596; Tue, 14 Jan 1997 14:25:39 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199701142125.OAA01596@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: bug in setsockopt()... ? To: roberto@keltia.freenix.fr (Ollivier Robert) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 14:25:39 -0700 (MST) Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: from "Ollivier Robert" at Jan 14, 97 08:22:15 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > According to Terry Lambert: > > some time ago). I believe that it *does not* include interaction > > of a mmap'ed object with the file I/O subsystem; currently, the only > > test that shows the INN failure to use msync() appropriately is INN > > itself. 8-(. > > It is fixed in INN 1.5.* where msync() can be configured in config.data. Yes; the point, though, wwas to demonstrate the failure case from improper use in the validation suite to flesh out the meaning of "implementation defined". This would result (ideally) in a man page "NOTES" section entry describing implementation specific behaviour for each of the implementations validated... Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.