This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]


On 02/21/2018 02:16 AM, Rical Jasan wrote:
> There is one undocumented DT_* macro in manual/filesys.texi: DT_WHT.  It
> is defined in dirent/dirent.h and appears to be used once in io/fts.c:
> #if defined FTS_WHITEOUT && 0
>                 if (dp->d_type == DT_WHT)
>                         p->fts_flags |= FTS_ISW;
> #endif
> For an entry in the manual, I was thinking something along the lines of:
> "This macro is obsolete and has no effect.  It was used to..."
> but I'm not sure what to say about what it was used for.
> Alternatively, could/should it be removed?  It looks like that might
> extend beyond just DT_WHT, as FTS_WHITEOUT also appears to be a NOOP:
> $ grep -rFn FTS_WHITEOUT .
> ./io/fts.h:75:#define FTS_WHITEOUT	0x0080		/* return whiteout information */
> ./io/fts.c:628:#if defined FTS_WHITEOUT && 0
> ./io/fts.c:629:	if (ISSET(FTS_WHITEOUT))
> ./io/fts.c:772:#if defined FTS_WHITEOUT && 0
> ./io/fts.c:881:#if defined FTS_WHITEOUT && 0
> Lastly, I can't find a reference to it in any of the standards I've
> managed to obtain so far (not to say that's exhaustive at all).  Is this
> also BSD?

Does this help?

I think it should be entirely removed, along with the removal


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]