}

>Hi,

>I'm porting some code from another system and have writting
>a function as follows:

>int FileOpen(char *FileName,int access,int share)
>{
> return(_open(FileName,access | share));
>}

>Now this should be a very straight forward function, but, after
>working through a problem I found some files set to read only.
>Odd thing is that one function that calls this func 3 times to get
>three file handles gets 2 files as RO, and 1 as RW.  Stepping
>the code shows the exact same parameters for access & share
>for all 3 files.

>WTF could be happening?

> >Hi,

> >I'm porting some code from another system and have writting
> >a function as follows:

> >int FileOpen(char *FileName,int access,int share)
> >{
> > return(_open(FileName,access | share));
> >}

> >Now this should be a very straight forward function, but, after
> >working through a problem I found some files set to read only.
> >Odd thing is that one function that calls this func 3 times to get
> >three file handles gets 2 files as RO, and 1 as RW.  Stepping
> >the code shows the exact same parameters for access & share
> >for all 3 files.

> >WTF could be happening?

> I have no idea, but _open doesn't take sharing flags. Look into
> _sopen.

> --
> Doug Harrison [VC++ MVP]
> Eluent Software, LLC
> http://www.eluent.com
> Tools for Visual C++ and Windows

> _open does indeed take sharing flags relating to the OS it comes
> from.  That is a moot point anyway, as the three calls that are made
> within two functions - both called from the same parent function in
> the same code block - are opening the file with the same params.
> Just that two get RO & one gets RW?  It's bizarre.  I've actually
> modified the FileOpen call to hardcode the flags as well, but still
> no joy.

> Think I might be spending another day slaving over what should
> be a straight forward operation.

> Gee, thanks Microsoft!!! :-(

> > >Hi,

> > >I'm porting some code from another system and have writting
> > >a function as follows:

> > >int FileOpen(char *FileName,int access,int share)
> > >{
> > > return(_open(FileName,access | share));
> > >}

> > >Now this should be a very straight forward function, but, after
> > >working through a problem I found some files set to read only.
> > >Odd thing is that one function that calls this func 3 times to get
> > >three file handles gets 2 files as RO, and 1 as RW.  Stepping
> > >the code shows the exact same parameters for access & share
> > >for all 3 files.

> > >WTF could be happening?

> > I have no idea, but _open doesn't take sharing flags. Look into
> > _sopen.

> > --
> > Doug Harrison [VC++ MVP]
> > Eluent Software, LLC
> > http://www.eluent.com
> > Tools for Visual C++ and Windows

>_open does indeed take sharing flags relating to the OS it comes
>from.

>That is a moot point anyway as the three calls that are made
>within two functions - both called from the same parent function in
>the same code block - are opening the file with the same params.
>Just that two get RO & one gets RW?  It's bizarre.  I've actually
>modified the FileOpen call to hardcode the flags as well, but still
>no joy.

>Think I might be spending another day slaving over what should
>be a straight forward operation.

>Gee, thanks Microsoft!!! :-(

> Do those two files, by any chance, have "read-only" attribute set?
> --
> With best wishes,
>     Igor Tandetnik

> > _open does indeed take sharing flags relating to the OS it comes
> > from.  That is a moot point anyway, as the three calls that are made
> > within two functions - both called from the same parent function in
> > the same code block - are opening the file with the same params.
> > Just that two get RO & one gets RW?  It's bizarre.  I've actually
> > modified the FileOpen call to hardcode the flags as well, but still
> > no joy.

> >_open does indeed take sharing flags relating to the OS it comes
> >from.

> Not in VC++. You need _sopen to specify sharing modes.

> >That is a moot point anyway as the three calls that are made
> >within two functions - both called from the same parent function in
> >the same code block - are opening the file with the same params.
> >Just that two get RO & one gets RW?  It's bizarre.  I've actually
> >modified the FileOpen call to hardcode the flags as well, but still
> >no joy.

> Well, _open is used by stdio, and I seriously doubt there is a bug in
> such commonly used functions.

> >Think I might be spending another day slaving over what should
> >be a straight forward operation.

> >Gee, thanks Microsoft!!! :-(

> If you don't figure it out, post the exact sequence of calls you are
> making, with all arguments exactly as you've written them.

> Thanks, but the sharing is not actually required in this case
> and this is just a stub for making compilation compatible.

> I would also doubt that stdio functions have a bug in them,
> but, and I probably should've mentioned this, it is sitting
> in an MFC application, so who knows what other niceties
> I have been given for free.

> I'll post some code soon if I can't track down the problem -
> there is a lot of code so I will be needing to minimize it whilst
> keeping the bug before posting.

> Thanks, Josh

> > >_open does indeed take sharing flags relating to the OS it comes
> > >from.

> > Not in VC++. You need _sopen to specify sharing modes.

> > >That is a moot point anyway as the three calls that are made
> > >within two functions - both called from the same parent function in
> > >the same code block - are opening the file with the same params.
> > >Just that two get RO & one gets RW?  It's bizarre.  I've actually
> > >modified the FileOpen call to hardcode the flags as well, but still
> > >no joy.

> > Well, _open is used by stdio, and I seriously doubt there is a bug in
> > such commonly used functions.

> > >Think I might be spending another day slaving over what should
> > >be a straight forward operation.

> > >Gee, thanks Microsoft!!! :-(

> > If you don't figure it out, post the exact sequence of calls you are
> > making, with all arguments exactly as you've written them.

> Are you asking in the files that are created, or the flags I am
> sending to _open?

> Either way, yes the 'read-only' attrib is set on the actual files,
> but they are requested to be normal files in the call to create
> them.  As I said, two are read-only, and one is read-write.

> The flags send into _open are exactly the same for all three
> files.

> I'm going to do a bit more hunting first before sending by
> code, as it is rather large.  I've got to see if there are any
> other things that is making Windows spit it's dummy
> between the calls to the file open calls.

> Point to note though, this code is a straight recompile of
> code working on another OS - the code is fine and has
> been for the last three years.

> Josh

> > Do those two files, by any chance, have "read-only" attribute set?
> > --
> > With best wishes,
> >     Igor Tandetnik

> > > _open does indeed take sharing flags relating to the OS it comes
> > > from.  That is a moot point anyway, as the three calls that are made
> > > within two functions - both called from the same parent function in
> > > the same code block - are opening the file with the same params.
> > > Just that two get RO & one gets RW?  It's bizarre.  I've actually
> > > modified the FileOpen call to hardcode the flags as well, but still
> > > no joy.

> I mean the attributes as known to a file system. You know, right-click on a
> file, choose Properties, there are three checkboxes: Read-only, Hidden,
> Archive near the bottom of the property sheet. What I'm asking is whether
> Read-only checkbox is checked on the two files that refuse to be opened
> other than as RO.

> From your answer I gather that they are indeed marked as Read-Only, while
> the third file, that can be opened as RW, is not so marked. If this is the
> case, I don't understand your problem at all. Read-only attribute is there
> for a purpose, you know, said purpose being not to allow opening the file
> for writing. Clear it (see SetFileAttributes or _chmod) if you need to write
> to those files.
> --
> With best wishes,
>     Igor Tandetnik

> > Are you asking in the files that are created, or the flags I am
> > sending to _open?

> > Either way, yes the 'read-only' attrib is set on the actual files,
> > but they are requested to be normal files in the call to create
> > them.  As I said, two are read-only, and one is read-write.

> > The flags send into _open are exactly the same for all three
> > files.

> > I'm going to do a bit more hunting first before sending by
> > code, as it is rather large.  I've got to see if there are any
> > other things that is making Windows spit it's dummy
> > between the calls to the file open calls.

> > Point to note though, this code is a straight recompile of
> > code working on another OS - the code is fine and has
> > been for the last three years.

> > Josh