From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Jun  9 16:43:35 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE01716A4DC
	for <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>; Wed,  9 Jun 2004 16:43:34 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from mail.tiscali.cz (stateless2.tiscali.cz [213.235.135.71])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FB3D43D46
	for <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>; Wed,  9 Jun 2004 16:43:34 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from hsn@netmag.cz)
Received: from asura.bsd (212.11.96.191) by mail.tiscali.cz (6.7.021)
	id 40B1F786006F6FEC for freebsd-arch@freebsd.org;
	Wed, 9 Jun 2004 18:43:33 +0200
Received: from hsn@localhost
	by asura.bsd (Exim 4.33_1 FreeBSD) id 1BY5Bw-000G5i-6y
	for <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>; Wed, 09 Jun 2004 17:40:40 +0200
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 17:40:40 +0200
From: Radim Kolar <hsn@netmag.cz>
To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <20040609154040.GA26229@asura.bsd>
Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i
Subject: fflush() on readonly files
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
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: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 16:43:35 -0000

I have submitted pr http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=65402 with patch
which makes fflush() on read only descriptors do not return error code.

Reasons for this patch:
1 - Do not breaks ISO C standard
2 - Makes FreeBSD undefined behavior compatible with other operation systems
3 - Correct some programs depending on this
4 - Makes fflush() and fsync() behavior identical - avoids programmer's confusion.
5 - If there are no data to flush() then flush operation (dummy) succeeds, not failed.

Against this patch:
  Programs which rely upon fflush() not returning an error
  when passed a file which is opened read-only are broken,
  and should be fixed.

  Colin Percival

Are there any other reasons for non commiting it? I think that in this case
pro > cons.