A NOTE has been added to this issue. 
====================================================================== 
https://www.austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1960 
====================================================================== 
Reported By:                steffen
Assigned To:                
====================================================================== 
Project:                    1003.1(2024)/Issue8
Issue ID:                   1960
Category:                   System Interfaces
Type:                       Enhancement Request
Severity:                   Editorial
Priority:                   high
Status:                     New
Name:                       steffen 
Organization:                
User Reference:              
Section:                    fcntl 
Page Number:                246 
Line Number:                8633 
Interp Status:              --- 
Final Accepted Text:         
====================================================================== 
Date Submitted:             2025-11-20 17:17 UTC
Last Modified:              2026-01-09 15:58 UTC
====================================================================== 
Summary:                    fcntl(): add F_DUPFD_CLOFORKEXEC flag
====================================================================== 

---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 (0007359) steffen (reporter) - 2026-01-09 15:58
 https://www.austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1960#c7359 
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
..especially since for example TZDB, OpenBSD lib/libc/gen/shm_open.c and
lib/libc/gen/login_cap.c, NetBSD lib/libc/stdio/gettemp.c and
ib/libc/time/localtime.c, so in practice a hundred percent (?, i think yes) of
all CLOFORK use cases come in combination with CLOEXEC.

It seems therefore wrong to assume that anyone who wants to set that on an
already open descriptor at all would like to go a different route.
The current approach therefore <em>will</em> end up with contortion and a
preprocessor jungle.

I for one therefore cannot follow the decision to "put that on the back burner".


Issue History 
Date Modified    Username       Field                    Change               
====================================================================== 
2025-11-20 17:17 steffen        New Issue                                    
2025-12-11 17:33 lanodan        Note Added: 0007336                          
2025-12-11 21:50 steffen        Note Added: 0007337                          
2025-12-11 21:52 steffen        Note Edited: 0007337                         
2025-12-11 21:52 steffen        Note Edited: 0007337                         
2026-01-08 16:11 lanodan        Note Added: 0007353                          
2026-01-08 16:11 lanodan        Note Edited: 0007353                         
2026-01-08 16:47 msbrown        Note Added: 0007354                          
2026-01-09 15:50 steffen        Note Added: 0007358                          
2026-01-09 15:58 steffen        Note Added: 0007359                          
======================================================================


  • [1003.1(20... Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
    • Re: [... Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The Open Group
      • R... Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The Open Group
    • [1003... Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
    • [1003... Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
    • [1003... Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
    • [1003... Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group

Reply via email to