> > That looks good. > > > > > .Fn mktemp > > > was marked as a legacy interface in > > > -.St -p1003.1-2001 > > > -and may be removed in a future release of > > > -.Ox . > > > +.St -p1003.1-2001 . > > > > That looks good too. I think that whoever wrote that saw smoking > > something. > > No, that is completely accurate. mktemp(3) was marked as a legacy > interface and does not appear in POSIX 1003-2008, which only specifies > mkdtemp() and mkstemp(). A lot of legacy interfaces were dropped > in 1003-2008.
If it isn't in POSIX anymore, then there is no need to mention POSIX. mktemp(3) is a fact on the ground. It can be used safely, in a loop. Furthermore, noone can remove it from their libc, since code which does use it safely exists. If we remove it from libc, those authors who need it (to create AF_UNIX sockets, device nodes, or named pipes) will rewrite it themselves, much worse. In my view, the paragraph glorifies POSIX above what it is due. Who gives a shit if something is in POSIX. Noone reads POSIX; it is not published and the only people reading it are using the pirated pdf's circling around.
