Michael Haggerty <mhag...@alum.mit.edu> writes: > Remove the following functions and rewrite their callers to use the > equivalent tempfile functions directly: > > * fdopen_lock_file() -> fdopen_tempfile() > * reopen_lock_file() -> reopen_tempfile() > * close_lock_file() -> close_tempfile()
Hmph, My knee-jerk reaction was "I thought lockfile abstraction was fine---why do we expose the implementation detail of the lockfile, which is now happen to be implemented on top of the tempfile API, to the callers?" I guess that was also where my comments on 02/14 "why do callers have to include tempfile.h separately?" came from. I'm undecided but would trust your judgement until I read thru to the end of the series ;-). -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
