Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 30 September 2016 at 16:39, Felix Janda wrote:
> > The F_EXLCK and F_SHLCK fcntl lock constants are obsolete synonyms for
> > F_WRLCK and F_RDLCK.
>
> This seems unlikely, since on for instance Alpha F_EXLCK is
> 16, F_SHLCK is 32, F_RDLCK is 1 and F_WRLCK is 2, so they'
Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 30 September 2016 at 16:39, Felix Janda wrote:
> > The F_EXLCK and F_SHLCK fcntl lock constants are obsolete synonyms for
> > F_WRLCK and F_RDLCK.
>
> This seems unlikely, since on for instance Alpha F_EXLCK is
> 16, F_SHLCK is 32, F_RDLCK is 1 and F_WRLCK is 2, so they'
On 30 September 2016 at 16:39, Felix Janda wrote:
> The F_EXLCK and F_SHLCK fcntl lock constants are obsolete synonyms for
> F_WRLCK and F_RDLCK.
This seems unlikely, since on for instance Alpha F_EXLCK is
16, F_SHLCK is 32, F_RDLCK is 1 and F_WRLCK is 2, so they're
all distinct:
http://lxr.free-
The F_EXLCK and F_SHLCK fcntl lock constants are obsolete synonyms for
F_WRLCK and F_RDLCK. Include to fix compilation with
the musl c library, which does not expose these constants.
Signed-off-by: Felix Janda
---
linux-user/syscall.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/linux-us
