Michael Haggerty [off-list ref] writes:
Remove the following functions and rewrite their callers to use the
equivalent tempfile functions directly:
* fdopen_lock_file() -> fdopen_tempfile()
* reopen_lock_file() -> reopen_tempfile()
* close_lock_file() -> close_tempfile()
Hmph,
My knee-jerk reaction was "I thought lockfile abstraction was
fine---why do we expose the implementation detail of the lockfile,
which is now happen to be implemented on top of the tempfile API, to
the callers?" I guess that was also where my comments on 02/14 "why
do callers have to include tempfile.h separately?" came from.
I'm undecided but would trust your judgement until I read thru to
the end of the series ;-).