![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 09:10:22AM -0500, Ulrich Drepper wrote: > I'm currently at the POSIX meeting and one thing covered was the > incompatibility of Linux's link() with the POSIX definition. The > difference is the treatment of symbolic links in the destination > name. Linux does not follow symlinks, POSIX requires it does. > > Even somebody thinks this is a good default behavior we cannot > change this because it would break the ABI. But the fact remains > that some application might want this behavior. > > We have one chance to help implementing this without breaking the > behavior. For this we could use the new linkat interface which > would need a new flags parameter. If the new parameter is > AT_SYMLINK_FOLLOW the new behavior could be invoked. > > I do not want to introduce such a patch now. But we could add the > parameter now, just don't use it. The patch below would do this. > Can we get this late patch applied before the release more or less > fixes the syscall API? Please stop adding these crappy flags argument everywhere, they're also creaping like a cancer through the other *at stuff. Just make linkat do the righ thing per posix spec for link, and then you can implement a posix link based on it in glibc if the user compiles with XOPEN_SOURCE or whatever. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-02-25 10:19 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||