Subject: Re: fcntl changes once again.
To: der Mouse <mouse@Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA>
From: Jason Thorpe <email@example.com>
Date: 07/13/1999 10:34:30
On Mon, 12 Jul 1999 23:31:10 -0400 (EDT)
der Mouse <mouse@Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA> wrote:
> > If bit (int)0x80000000 (F_FORFS) is set, we process the fcntl in an
> > ioctl-ish fashon. [...]
> This looks so ioctlish I have to ask, why not just use ioctl?
Because ioctl(2) on a UFS doesn't have the semantics he needs. He needs
to modify the file node itself, not whatever device it actually references,
-- Jason R. Thorpe <firstname.lastname@example.org>