24.05.2017 14:09, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) пишет:
One could do this I suppose, but I read POSIX differently from you and, more importantly, SS_ONSTACK breaks portability on numerous other systems and is a no-op on Linux. So, the Linux man page really should warn against its use in the strongest terms.
So how about instead of the strongest terms towards the code's author, just explain that SS_ONSTACK is a bit-value on some/many OSes, and as such, 0 is a valid value to enable sas on them, plus all the other values would give EINVAL? No strongest terms will help w/o an explanation, because people will keep looking for something that suits as a missing SS_ENABLE. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
