From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: DJ Delorie <dj@redhat.com>
To: gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: DOS/Windows-specific code: source.c
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 14:00:00 -0000
Message-id: <xnd79jv9o7.fsf@greed.delorie.com>
References: <20010503211502.21716.qmail@web6401.mail.yahoo.com> <3AF1DAA0.3060702@cygnus.com> <200105071609.TAA24129@is.elta.co.il> <200105081149.OAA06252@is.elta.co.il> <xnoft3vmip.fsf@greed.delorie.com> <20010508141619.B25705@redhat.com> <8361-Tue08May2001222325+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-SW-Source: 2001-05/msg00155.html


"Eli Zaretskii" <eliz@is.elta.co.il> writes:
> Perhaps, but this is not the problem I was trying to solve.  The issue
> is whether _any_ platform needs to put O_BINARY into mode in this

If it's host-specific code, perhaps.  But it's better if nobody needs
to know whether or not O_BINARY is available; they only need to know
if it's *appropriate*.  If the file is binary, use O_BINARY.  If it is
text, don't.  On platforms where O_BINARY is zero, it does nothing,
but does prevent yet another needless host test.