[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <519381D8.5080206@draigBrady.com>
Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 13:38:48 +0100
From: Pádraig Brady <P@...igBrady.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
CC: Eric Blake <eblake@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: RFC: allow empty symlink targets
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,
or the Solaris behavior of allowing empty symlink targets.
cheers,
Pádraig.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists