Re: more glibc breakage on kfreebsd-amd64
> Have you looked at the script though? This is a really weird hack:
> exec 9<&0 </etc/fstab
> 9 isn't referenced anywhere else... it's not surprising that if you redirect a
> non-existant descriptor to 0, your fd 0 will be messed up. I wonder how this
> can possibly work on gnu/linux.
Yes, I looked at it. It appears in pairs:
exec 9<&0 </etc/fstab
exec 0<&9 9<&-
Something like push and pop (or save and restore) of descriptor 0.
Only instead of stack descriptor 9 is used.
The question is why is descriptor 0 closed just before the "exec 9<&0 </etc/fstab".