linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.21-git10/11: files getting truncated on xfs? or maybe an nlink problem?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 14 May 2007 13:27:43 -0700
From:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>
CC:	Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>, David Chinner <dgc@....com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	xfs@....sgi.com, michal.k.k.piotrowski@...il.com
Subject: Re: 2.6.21-git10/11: files getting truncated on xfs? or maybe an
 nlink problem?

Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On May 12 2007 07:46, Matt Mackall wrote:
>   
>>> You should not assume alphabetical order. Filesystems may be free to
>>> reorder things and return them (1) randomly like in a hash (2) by
>>> creation time during readdir().
>>>       
>> There is no assumption. Mercurial explicitly visits files in
>> alphabetical order for the above commands.
>>     
>
> But who says that
>
>   for i in {a..z}; do  ## {..} is a bash3 extension
>     touch $i;
>   done;
>
> actually makes readdir() return them in the same order?

Nobody.  But doing a readdir, sorting the results and visiting the files
in that order does mean you'll visit them in alphabetical order.  Hence
"explicitly visits".

    J
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/