Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 16:04:40 +1000 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libc/sys pathconf.2 Message-ID: <20040708154704.L13116@gamplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <200407080133.i681XnxH041060@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> References: <200407072047.i67Klgqu082069@repoman.freebsd.org> <20040707233455.GI95729@elvis.mu.org> <200407080133.i681XnxH041060@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004, Garrett Wollman wrote:
> <<On Wed, 7 Jul 2004 16:34:55 -0700, Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org> said:
>
> > if _PC_NO_TRUNC returns 1 then an application should assume that
> > names longer than 14 characters (_POSIX_NAME_MAX) are truncated???
>
> No. Under obsolete versions of POSIX, if {NO_TRUNC} is nonzero, an
> application should assume that pathname components longer than
> {NAME_MAX} are not truncated, but instead result in the [ENAMETOOLONG]
> error. Under the current version of POSIX, [ENAMETOOLONG] is
> mandatory for all systems; this was an obsolete option to allow for
> the behavior of the V7 filesystem, which has been phased out.
This doesn't apply to FreeBSD. Truncation is still useful (and used) for
old non-POSIX file systems like msdosfs:
% static int
% msdosfs_pathconf(ap)
% struct vop_pathconf_args /* {
% struct vnode *a_vp;
% int a_name;
% int *a_retval;
% } */ *ap;
% {
% struct msdosfsmount *pmp = VTODE(ap->a_vp)->de_pmp;
%
% switch (ap->a_name) {
% ...
% case _PC_NO_TRUNC:
% *ap->a_retval = 0;
% return (0);
% ...
% }
htpfs and ntpfs also return 0 for _PC_NO_TRUNC, possibly for less reason.
AFAIK they don't have too-small file name lengths, but they may need to
truncate names because that is what their native operating system does.
Bruce
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040708154704.L13116>