[oguz-ismail2]

Title says Unix, renameat2 is Linux-only.

[jasode]

>Title says Unix,

You're misinterpreting the title. The author didn't intend "Unix" to literally mean only the official AT&T/TheOpenGroup UNIX® System to the exclusion of Linux.

The first sentence of "UNIX-like" makes that clear : >This is a catalog of things UNIX-like/POSIX-compliant operating systems can do atomically,

Further down, he then mentions some Linux specifics : >fcntl(fd, F_GETLK, &lock), fcntl(fd, F_SETLK, &lock), and fcntl(fd, F_SETLKW, &lock) . [...] There is a “mandatory locking” mode but Linux’s implementation is unreliable as it’s subject to a race condition.

[shawn_w]

Bit rot alert: Linux doesn't even have mandatory file locks these days.

Linux-specific open file description locks could be brought up in a modern version of TFA though.

[monibious]

But I also don't think the auther meant Things you can do in Linux but not Unix

[bee_rider]

They aren’t misinterpreting the title, the title is incorrect.

[stephenr]

Sounds like the key term then is probably this:

> POSIX-compliant

Which, FWIW, doesn't mean Linux. AFAIK there is no Linux distro that's fully compliant, even before you worry about the specifics of whether it's certified as compliant.

[pjmlp]

Except POSIX doesn't specify some of them as happening atomically.

Many people write UNIX/POSIX without ever reading what it says.