[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: rename("symlink-to-dir/", "name") behavior
From: |
Jim Meyering |
Subject: |
Re: rename("symlink-to-dir/", "name") behavior |
Date: |
Fri, 22 Feb 2008 14:09:26 +0100 |
Eric Blake <address@hidden> wrote:
> I wrote the aardvark along those lines, and it was rejected in yesterday's
> meeting of the Austin Group. They argued that Linux is allowed to fail to
> follow symlink-to-dir/ in the rename and rmdir case, but only if it
> returns a different errno than ENOTDIR.
>
> https://www.opengroup.org/sophocles/show_mail.tpl?CALLER=index.tpl&source=L&listname=austin-group-l&id=11349
Yeah, I saw that exchange.
Too bad. Thanks for trying.
> I wonder if we would have much luck proposing a patch to the Linux kernel
> folks to do just that?
Do you see another errno symbol name that makes sense?
I think that ENOTDIR makes the most sense from a semantic point of view.
It might be a hard sell.
> Otherwise, I'm afraid that coreutils mv and rmdir
> will just have to remain non-POSIX-compliant on Linux because the
> underlying syscall is violating semantics.
That would be neither a problem nor anything new. I think of it as
a feature: I try hard to maintain POSIX compliance, but not blindly,
and certainly not when doing so would make the tools behave in such an
unintuitive manner.