Glibc change exposing bugs
Posted Nov 11, 2010 2:41 UTC (Thu) by quotemstr
In reply to: Glibc change exposing bugs
Parent article: Glibc change exposing bugs
the kernel developers fixed things so that applications would not lose data even if they weren't following standard behavior
What some filesystem developers propose applications do isn't defined by any standard. POSIX, SuS, and so on don't state what happens after a crash, fsync() or not. The argument was over what to do in certain circumstances outside any standard. The argument was must muddled because one said kept claiming that its brand of brain damage was endorsed by the standard. Fortunately, sanity prevailed. Calling fsync() after every rename would have inconvenienced application developers and decreased performance.
memcpy, on the other hand, is clearly described by the relevant standards. Application developers deserve what they get.
to post comments)