🚀 go-pugleaf

>: I don't know about the last statement.  I suspect Microport is using AT&T's
>: closedir() implementation, the SVR3.0 version of which was derived from one
>: of my earlier public-domain implementations.  R. Salz pointed out the bug
>: to me and I fixed it long ago; here is my current version:
>
>The closedir on my system consists of just the three calls: two frees
>and a close. There is no error checking of any kind.

The "closedir" in AT&T's S5R3.[01] implementation consists of just the
three calls: two frees and a close.  There is no error checking of any
kind, unless you count the fact that the return value of the "close" is
the return value of "closedir".... 

In other words, your observation about the contents of your system's
"closedir" is not at all inconsistent with Doug's hypothesis that
Microport is using AT&T's standard "closedir".