This looks okay to me. (plus two months ping)
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 8:19 PM, Ted Unangst <t...@tedunangst.com> wrote: > Oh, right, I reworded it slightly, but I think this is something we should > note. > > Index: fsync.2 > > ================================================================================================= > > RCS file: /home/cvs/src/lib/libc/sys/fsync.2,v > retrieving revision 1.14 > diff -u -p -r1.14 fsync.2 > --- fsync.2 10 Sep 2015 17:55:21 -0000 1.14 > +++ fsync.2 16 Apr 2019 20:18:03 -0000 > @@ -66,6 +66,16 @@ and > .Fn fdatasync > should be used by programs that require a file to be in a known state, > for example, in building a simple transaction facility. > +.Pp > +If > +.Fn fsync > +or > +.Fn fdatasync > +fails with > +.Er EIO , > +the state of the on-disk data may have been only partially written. > +To guard against potential inconsistency, future calls will continue failing > +until all references to the file are closed. > .Sh RETURN VALUES > .Rv -std fsync fdatasync > .Sh ERRORS
