On 17.04.2020 18:46, Robert Elz wrote: > Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 16:49:40 +0200 > From: Kamil Rytarowski <n54%gmx.com@localhost> > Message-ID: <cb2d0341-30cd-8935-3a25-02ced4c164bf%gmx.com@localhost> > > | I use this in ksh and I find this as a useful feature. > > If you just mean that you use noclobber mode (set -C) for > protection (what little it offers) then that's fine - that's > never going away (and O_NOCLOBBER is largely irrelevant to > that kind of use). > > If you mean you use noclobber in scripts to aid in implementing > (sh script level) locking primitives, or for filename generation > (ie: re-implementing mktemp in sh code for some reason) then I'd > suggest that you should find a better way. If you insist on > continuing that way, then O_NOCLOBBER might allow such mechanisms > (locking particularly) to work reliably. > > kre > I just use it to protect from overwriting preexisting files by an accident. If O_NOCLOBBER can be useful in the implementation of this feature in shells, it is a nice to have addition.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature