From: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
To: "Pádraig Brady" <P@draigBrady.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RFC: allow empty symlink targets
Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 08:40:09 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51939E49.1040209@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <519381D8.5080206@draigBrady.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1943 bytes --]
On 05/15/2013 06:38 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> On 01/17/2013 04:22 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> On 01/17/2013 01:03 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>>> The discussion leading to this is at http://bugs.gnu.org/13447
>>> In summary other systems allow an empty target for a symlink,
>>> and POSIX specifies that it should be allowed?
>>
>> In relation to this, Eric Blake said:
>>
>>> In today's Austin Group meeting, I was tasked to open a new bug that
>>> would state specifically how the empty symlink is resolved; the intent
>>> is to allow both Solaris behavior (current directory) and BSD behavior
>>> (ENOENT). Meanwhile, everyone was in agreement that the Linux kernel
>>> has a bug for rejecting the creation of an empty symlink, but once that
>>> bug is fixed, then Linux can choose either Solaris or BSD behavior for
>>> how to resolve such a symlink.
>>>
>>> It will probably be a bug report similar to this one, which regarded how
>>> to handle a symlink containing just slashes:
>>> http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=541
>
> Following up from http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=649
> It seems POSIX will now allow the current Linux behavior of returning ENOENT,
Huh? Linux currently doesn't allow the creation of an empty symlink.
That link mentions the current BSD behavior of returning ENOENT when
resolving such a symlink (that is, what stat() does when chasing through
an empty symlink, provided such a symlink is first created).
> or the Solaris behavior of allowing empty symlink targets.
The point made in that bug report is that Linux is buggy for not
allowing symlink() to create an empty symlink in the first place; once
you allow the creation of an empty symlink, then how to handle such a
symlink in stat() is up to you whether to copy Solaris' or BSD's example.
--
Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 621 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-15 14:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-17 13:03 RFC: allow empty symlink targets Pádraig Brady
2013-01-17 13:03 ` [PATCH] symlink: allow an empty target string Pádraig Brady
2013-01-17 16:22 ` RFC: allow empty symlink targets Pádraig Brady
2013-05-15 12:38 ` Pádraig Brady
2013-05-15 14:40 ` Eric Blake [this message]
2013-05-15 20:48 ` Pádraig Brady
2013-05-24 10:01 ` Pavel Machek
2013-05-15 22:03 ` Al Viro
2013-05-16 9:37 ` Pádraig Brady
2013-05-16 12:22 ` Eric Blake
2013-05-26 9:39 ` Pavel Machek
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=51939E49.1040209@redhat.com \
--to=eblake@redhat.com \
--cc=P@draigBrady.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox