On the silliness of close() giving EDQUOT

[Barry Shein]

From: gt0178a at prism.gatech.EDU (Jim Burns)
>in article <BZS.90Oct19233255 at world.std.com>, bzs at world.std.com (Barry Shein) says:
>
>> OS/360/370 interrupted (signal) when there was an I/O error
>> (SYNAD=handler) of any sort and you could pick apart what happened in
>> the handler() routine.
>
>> The only hard part was knowing where your program was when the error
>> struck.
>
>And what do you do if the I/O is done as the result of a close? And worse,
>if the close is a result of exit processing, and the process doesn't exist
>anymore to get the interrupt? Without timely notification, it's hard to
>recover.

Uh, we're going around in circles here. The assumptions in that thread
was that none of what you mention was the case. Obviously if you care
about errors you better do your own close() and not leave it to the
process rundown (but there's no reason that can't interrupt also.)
-- 
        -Barry Shein

Software Tool & Die    | {xylogics,uunet}!world!bzs | bzs at world.std.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202        | Login: 617-739-WRLD