Well, I don't know if it's a bad idea, but FlushFileBuffers isn't guaranteed to do anything, and usually doesn't in the very instances that you need it most. But since sync(3) isn't guaranteed to do anything anyway, I guess it cancels out.
I'd be sure to put comments in there saying that it really can't be relied on to do anything though. That will avoid people who come along later, see that sync looks like it should be "working" but isn't, and wonder what's wrong when there really isn't anything "wrong". -- Gary R. Van Sickle > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Reini Urban > Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 9:36 PM > To: cygwin-patches mailing-list > Subject: sync(3) > > Why is this a bad idea? > -- > Reini Urban > http://xarch.tu-graz.ac.at/home/rurban/ > >
