From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id qARM8u4g096698 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 2012 16:08:56 -0600 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (173-166-109-252-newengland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.166.109.252]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id UsiOKRBDatCS25AD (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 27 Nov 2012 14:11:13 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 17:11:11 -0500 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests: test EROFS vs. EEXIST when creating on an RO filesystem Message-ID: <20121127221111.GA13753@infradead.org> References: <50B52DB7.3030506@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <50B52DB7.3030506@redhat.com> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Eric Sandeen Cc: xfs-oss On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 03:16:39PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: > TBH, I don't know if this is posix-specified, but I found out the > hard way that when trying to re-create existing files on a readonly > filesystem, some apps expect/handle EEXIST, but fail on EROFS. > > This will test mkdir, mknod, and symlinks for that behavior. Just curious, which filesystem would fail this currently or did in the past? _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs