Re: ioctl(2) vs sys/ioctl.h

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Rhialto
Date: Sunday, December 19, 2010 - 1:06 pm

On Sun 19 Dec 2010 at 19:32:49 +0000, David Laight wrote:

Easier: the aforementioned constant FLUSHR (and all others) can be
defined as ((void *)1234) (for appropriate values of 1234).

However, we don't have streams, so no streams ioctls, which makes the
point moot, at least for the given example.

-Olaf.
-- 
___ Olaf 'Rhialto' Seibert  -- There's no point being grown-up if you 
\X/ rhialto/at/xs4all.nl    -- can't be childish sometimes. -The 4th Doctor
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
ioctl(2) vs sys/ioctl.h, Paul Goyette, (Sat Dec 18, 5:06 pm)
Re: ioctl(2) vs sys/ioctl.h, Christos Zoulas, (Sat Dec 18, 5:24 pm)
Re: ioctl(2) vs sys/ioctl.h, der Mouse, (Sat Dec 18, 7:44 pm)
Re: ioctl(2) vs sys/ioctl.h, Iain Hibbert, (Sun Dec 19, 2:35 am)
Re: ioctl(2) vs sys/ioctl.h, Paul Goyette, (Sun Dec 19, 9:00 am)
Re: ioctl(2) vs sys/ioctl.h, David Laight, (Sun Dec 19, 12:32 pm)
Re: ioctl(2) vs sys/ioctl.h, Rhialto, (Sun Dec 19, 1:06 pm)
Re: ioctl(2) vs sys/ioctl.h, David Laight, (Sun Dec 19, 1:32 pm)
Re: ioctl(2) vs sys/ioctl.h, der Mouse, (Sun Dec 19, 2:52 pm)
Re: ioctl(2) vs sys/ioctl.h, Christos Zoulas, (Sun Dec 19, 2:59 pm)