Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1998 19:02:25 -0600 From: Dan Nelson <dnelson@emsphone.com> To: sthaug@nethelp.no, nathan@rtfm.net Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: O_SYNC Message-ID: <19981109190225.A22989@emsphone.com> In-Reply-To: <12424.910656226@verdi.nethelp.no>; from "sthaug@nethelp.no" on Tue Nov 10 01:03:46 GMT 1998 References: <19981109185638.B8871@rtfm.net> <12424.910656226@verdi.nethelp.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In the last episode (Nov 10), sthaug@nethelp.no said: > > > Yes, however every other OS defines it at "O_SYNC" why are we different? > > > or, if there is a reason, why isn't there a compatibility #define? > > > > > > can someone check this on netbsd/open bsd/os ? is it bsd or us? > > > > NetBSD 1.3.2: > > fcntl.h:92:#define O_SYNC 0x0080 /* synchronous writes */ > > fcntl.h:127:#define FFSYNC O_SYNC /* kernel */ > > fcntl.h:129:#define O_FSYNC O_SYNC /* compat */ > > BSD/OS 3.1 fcntl.h: > > #define O_FSYNC 0x0080 /* synchronous writes */ > #define FFSYNC O_FSYNC /* kernel */ It's O_SYNC on Dec OSF/1, SCO Open Server, and SunOS too. -Dan Nelson dnelson@emsphone.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19981109190225.A22989>