From 72f8598403390231085544da4a261b08df038819 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Thomas Schwinge Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 18:27:45 +0200 Subject: Typo fixes. --- open_issues/gcc.mdwn | 2 +- open_issues/open_symlink.mdwn | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) (limited to 'open_issues') diff --git a/open_issues/gcc.mdwn b/open_issues/gcc.mdwn index d8a8cd5f..2b772cfc 100644 --- a/open_issues/gcc.mdwn +++ b/open_issues/gcc.mdwn @@ -314,7 +314,7 @@ Last reviewed up to the [[Git mirror's 3a930d3fc68785662f5f3f4af02474cb21a62056 * `gcc/config/gnu-user.h` defines `*SPLIT_STACK*` macros -- which aren't valid for us (yet), I think. - * Also see [[sourceware_PR 10686]], glibc commit + * Also see [[!sourceware_PR 10686]], glibc commit ecbf434213c0333d81706074e4d107ac45011635 `Reserve new TLS field for x86 and x86_64` (`__private_ss`). diff --git a/open_issues/open_symlink.mdwn b/open_issues/open_symlink.mdwn index f71109a9..663bfcbd 100644 --- a/open_issues/open_symlink.mdwn +++ b/open_issues/open_symlink.mdwn @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ License|/fdl]]."]]"""]] ## IRC, OFTC, #debian-hurd, 2013-05-08 - the hurd issue is that Q_NOFOLLOW seems broken on symlinks, and + the hurd issue is that O_NOFOLLOW seems broken on symlinks, and thus open(symlink, O_NOFOLLOW) doesn't fail with ELOOP I don't really see why it should fail since NOFOLLOW says not to follow the symlink -- cgit v1.2.3