andrew@alice.uucp (Andrew Hume) (03/20/90)
From: andrew@alice.uucp (Andrew Hume) the posix 1003.1 standard has cleverly evaded naming of bits in the mode field of the stat structure. it does this by defining tests (like S_ISDIR(mode) rather than (mode&S_IFMT)==S_IFDIR). the question is, how do people deal with sym links? I simply added a S_ISLNK macro but would prefer to go with the flow if there is one. Volume-Number: Volume 19, Number 11
decot@hpisod2.HP.COM (Dave Decot) (03/22/90)
> the posix 1003.1 standard has cleverly evaded naming of bits > in the mode field of the stat structure. it does this by > defining tests (like S_ISDIR(mode) rather than (mode&S_IFMT)==S_IFDIR). > the question is, how do people deal with sym links? I simply > added a S_ISLNK macro but would prefer to go with the flow > if there is one. > > Volume-Number: Volume 19, Number 11 The current draft of POSIX.1b (Extensions to POSIX.1) is adding symlinks, and has added a macro as you describe by that name. Dave Decot