Cygwin (Robert Collins) wrote: > === > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Igor Pechtchanski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >>> I still suspect we need a <= rather than == - but we'll see :}. >>> >>> Rob >> >> Only if "files" is traversed in order of decreasing minlevel. >> Otherwise we'd have to traverse the whole set before we can find the >> right log file. Either way, a simple "<=" won't do it, IMO... > > Yes but :]. > > My point is that given the following: > a level 1 and a level 2 log file, should logfile name(3) fail, or find > 1/2 ?
I would have thought fail. I can see an argument for wanting logfile(2) to find a level 3 log file if no level 2 exists, though. Max. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
