> Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 22:05:33 +0200 > Cc: bug-make@gnu.org, david.s.bo...@gmail.com, psm...@gnu.org, > bo...@kolpackov.net > From: Frank Heckenbach <f.heckenb...@fh-soft.de> > > Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > > Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 20:39:44 +0200 > > > Cc: psm...@gnu.org, e...@gnu.org, bo...@kolpackov.net > > > From: Frank Heckenbach <f.heckenb...@fh-soft.de> > > > > > > Indeed, as you suggested earlier, it might be useful to use the main > > > part of open_tmpfile() (i.e. without the fdopen()), though we'd have > > > to manually remove the file then. On Unix, we could unlink it right > > > after opening (since we never need the filename again, unlike the > > > other users of open_tmpfile()). On Windows, though, this might need > > > to be delayed, AIUI. > > > > You can do that on Windows as well, just not if you use open/creat to > > create the file. You need to use the Windows file APIs with options > > that are not exposed to Posix-style functions like open. > > Can you get an fd from a file opened this way?
Yes. > If so, it should be alright, it could all be encapsulated in > open_tmpfd(). I'm not sure it's worth the hassle. Using tmpfile is so much easier (if it works, which is to be determined). _______________________________________________ Bug-make mailing list Bug-make@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
