Revert r240931, as the previous comment was actually in sync with POSIX.

I have to note that POSIX is simply stupid in how it describes O_EXEC/fexecve
and friends. Yes, not only inconsistent, but stupid.

In the open(2) description, O_RDONLY flag is described as:

	O_RDONLY	Open for reading only.

Taken from:

	http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/open.html

Note "for reading only". Not "for reading or executing"!

In the fexecve(2) description you can find:

	The fexecve() function shall fail if:

	[EBADF]
		The fd argument is not a valid file descriptor open for executing.

Taken from:

	http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/exec.html

As you can see the function shall fail if the file was not open with O_EXEC!

And yet, if you look closer you can find this mess in the exec.html:

	Since execute permission is checked by fexecve(), the file description
	fd need not have been opened with the O_EXEC flag.

Yes, O_EXEC flag doesn't have to be specified after all. You can open a file
with O_RDONLY and you still be able to fexecve(2) it.

0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions