From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andy Wingo Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: request tmpfile(3) wrapping in Guile 1.9 libguile Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2010 18:06:35 +0100 Message-ID: References: <877hqoubkv.fsf@ambire.localdomain> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1265649160 14239 80.91.229.12 (8 Feb 2010 17:12:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2010 17:12:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-user@gnu.org, Thien-Thi Nguyen To: Ken Raeburn Original-X-From: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 08 18:12:34 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-user@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NeX9v-0000TG-Rj for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2010 18:12:28 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44744 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NeX9v-0002Kt-3z for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2010 12:12:27 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NeX5z-00005k-1l for guile-user@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2010 12:08:23 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=48333 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NeX5y-00005I-Fj for guile-user@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2010 12:08:22 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NeX5w-0001Vd-Fx for guile-user@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2010 12:08:22 -0500 Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:50093 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NeX5v-0001VD-68 for guile-user@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2010 12:08:20 -0500 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D8179831D; Mon, 8 Feb 2010 12:08:18 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=5ap0GhQ3MPX5nEpljX3Ulq24ZAU=; b=hkGKWL hiyejOGDVq6TVfjsY5Xv+VRVPK4G9pveHWJv/kGgyE1uoS/sBi06KRGAlexI2j95 WJm8AtVqwiFDMK8L70XkYA1/MtOjpGTCzbnvw3myJt34c5y38ILZCWKOKcNqwRW4 RuHfP3B8Cx7vKiDRfDfvKMOyhyoNCcv5MRm3o= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=hA2AzsX8CDgPVErz6Q2qVPVpD1fniaFm wuTPRdb5v2eCh2JV4BDHQ2YVbCmI5k9KGE++5sWD4B3tMDX7C5YdFt+AD/5ptziZ WWhDHefnoz5rBRVp6Qsdo+fhaK3jVHahmG25f32uETw40ZARC045w+F02dAPTWCd a9Wgv+Aa/mo= Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix. (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5869C9831C; Mon, 8 Feb 2010 12:08:16 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from unquote (unknown [83.202.38.6]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B620198319; Mon, 8 Feb 2010 12:08:13 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Ken Raeburn's message of "Mon, 8 Feb 2010 10:34:39 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.92 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 8C43AE4E-14D4-11DF-A1CE-6AF7ED7EF46B-02397024!a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General Guile related discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.user:7627 Archived-At: Hi, On Mon 08 Feb 2010 16:34, Ken Raeburn writes: > On Feb 8, 2010, at 06:11, Andy Wingo wrote: > >> 3. Is tmpfile(3) really needed, if you have mkstemp! and dynamic >> extents? Here's what I use, for example: > > But mkstemp doesn't guarantee that no one else will grab the file name > in between the time mkstemp checks that the file doesn't exist, and when > you actually open(O_CREAT) it. It does. The return value from mkstemp! is a port, and it mutates the template to give you a file name. See mkstemp(3). Andy -- http://wingolog.org/