[lkml]   [2000]   [Nov]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [BUG] Inconsistent behaviour of rmdir
At 07:51 PM 11/16/2000 +0100, you wrote:
>Now I see your point : by "." or "foo/." you mean the directory itself,
>while "foo" or "foo/" refer to the link to the directory, and they are
>obviously different objects... at least since hard links on directories
>were introduced. Fine.

. and foo/. are also links, not directories... the directories themselves
are filesystem internal objects, and not discussed by the standard. I
didn't know that linux supported hard links to directories... Isn't that
just asking for trouble?

> > Besides, we clearly violated
> > all relevant standards - rmdir() and rename() are required to fail
> > if the last component of name happens to "." or "..".
>By standard, do you imply 'de facto' ? Or does any source clearly state
>this ?

It rarely hurts to violate even a written standard when it says something
like this... If it says something like this (which can only happen
intentionally, afaict) should fail, but you can do something intelligent
instead, you probably should.

This message has been brought to you by the letter alpha and the number pi.
Open Source: Think locally, act globally.
David Feuer

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:47    [W:0.053 / U:4.540 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site