Re: lynx-dev REUSE_TEMPFILES problem (more)

[Leonid Pauzner]

16-Jul-99 11:00 Klaus Weide wrote:

> No, it should not be equivalent - the difference is
>    LYReopenTemp(fname)   vs.   LYOpenTemp(fname, suffix, mode).

Oops, I read changes by eye, just add #else
but no change LYReopenTemp to LYOpenTemp.
With LYOpenTemp now have a pile of old versions.

> LYReopenTemp appends - the name could be clearer.
> LYOpenTemp should never append - it will assign a new filename.

> Actually, my suggested change isn't good, it would still leave the
> older versions hanging around...  (only until Lynx exits, I hope).
> Some more change is needed for !HAVE_TRUNCATE, to get rid of the
> previous version.  But..
I know no reason for this low level programming around LYOpenTempRewrite(),
why not remove the file and create new tempfile with the same file name
and permissions. Perhaps multitasking force us to be sure
nobody will use our file name within short timeslot after removing
but before creating another...

> how about just remove()ing the file instead of truncate(), for DOS,
> (and then procede as in the truncate-was-successful case), could you
> try that?

>> The text still appended...

> Have you tried it?  What I think you should have seen is not text
> being appended, but multiple files piling up.  (like what you
> saw at first)
see above.