Re: fexecve, round 2

[manu%netbsd.org@localhost (Emmanuel Dreyfus)]

Thor Lancelot Simon <tls%panix.com@localhost> wrote:

> This appears to contradict either the description of O_EXEC in the
> standard, or the standard's rationale for adding fexecve().  The
> standard says O_EXEC causes the file to be open for execution "only".

The definition is really vague. As I understand, nothing forbids opening
O_EXEC|O_RDWR. I understood O_EXEC as "I explicitely say I will execute
this fd will fexecve, so let me open even if I cannot read"
 
How do you understand it?

-- 
Emmanuel Dreyfus
http://hcpnet.free.fr/pubz
manu%netbsd.org@localhost