Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 20:19:59 +0200 From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> To: Jordan Hubbard <jkh@osd.bsdi.com> Cc: dillon@earth.backplane.com, bde@zeta.org.au, steveo@eircom.net, david@catwhisker.org, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: symlink(2) [Was: Re: tcsh.cat] Message-ID: <89423.992715599@critter> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 15 Jun 2001 22:15:21 PDT." <20010615221521A.jkh@osd.bsdi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20010615221521A.jkh@osd.bsdi.com>, Jordan Hubbard writes: >From: Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com> >Subject: Re: symlink(2) [Was: Re: tcsh.cat] >Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 22:01:47 -0700 (PDT) > >> Symlinks do not have to contain paths. People use them for all sorts >> of things so it would be totally inappropriate to put any sort of > >True. It would break phk's malloc debugging features to disable this, >for example. Not only that, but considerning that a symlink can point into a different filesystem even in normal use, there is no simple way to validate the valididty of the name. Consider this symlink: ln -s /my_FAT16_filesystem/foo:bar /tmp/blaf as a silly example of this. The only two real restrictions on symlinks are that they cannot contain NUL characters and that '/' means what '/' does in all filesystem naming on UNIX. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?89423.992715599>