On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 18:32:33 -0800 "Mark Pizzolato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Every normal POSIX compliant platform provides reentrant and thread > > safe tmpfile(). > > Solaris man pages for tmpnam(), and tempnam() and tmpfile() suggest > that tmpfile() uses tmpnam() and that tmpnam() is not threadsafe. No, it doesn't. It just says that "The tmpnam() function is unsafe in multithreaded applications. The tempnam() function is safe in multithreaded applications and should be used instead." No word about tmpfile(). Also `man -s5 attributes` doesn't list tmpfile() as a MT-unsafe function. > exists a real likelyhood that collisions will occur on systems which > have relatively low resolution updates to the microsecond return from > gettimeofday(). To protect against potential collisions it uses a last result of cli_md5buff as a salt. -- oo ..... Tomasz Kojm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (\/)\......... http://www.ClamAV.net/gpg/tkojm.gpg \..........._ 0DCA5A08407D5288279DB43454822DC8985A444B //\ /\ Thu Dec 2 11:32:11 CET 2004
pgpSAtqC2gpfT.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ http://lists.clamav.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clamav-devel
