--[I think anyone who understood that explanation on the first read is a total freak,]--

You might be on the wrong website, did you mean to type aol.com?

(Does an "average IQ of 120" mean that you think 120 is the average, or that your IQ fluctuates depending on the day of the week or something? If the latter, just try reading it again later.)

That explanation reminds of the section of the newspaper that summarizes soap opera plotlines.

I think anyone who understood that explanation on the first read is a total freak, I have an average IQ of 120, and it looked like a total clusterf*** to me.

Yeah, yeah, you hear that it isn't productive to place blame. Well, this one clearly is an issue where if the programmer had worked the bug when it was first reported he would have solved it 25 years ago. Clearly this is indicative of the problems with programmers. They only want to code for glory and are willing to give up on some bugs to add new features.

Fix you damn bugs up front so we don't have 25 years of problems propagated to every sort of variation of your code.

I've been saying it for years and years. Not only that if this guy could figure it out 25 years later, if he could develop the tools to test it out in order to reproduce it, then 25 years ago the original author could have done the same thing.

Pure laziness, just pure laziness.

Marc's comment:
http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20080508193255&pid=11
and this reply:
http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20080508193255&pid=13
outline what really went on. seekdir() has presumably been little-used, or little-trusted, by developers after being deprecated as such in POSIX.

That was so interesting that I almost woke up from falling asleep while reading it!

heh that is so cool. :D

Let's hope that this creates a fierce competition in which MS also starts fixing 25 year old bugs.