Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 14:36:50 -0400 From: "Brian F. Feldman" <green@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> Cc: "Brian F. Feldman" <green@FreeBSD.ORG>, "Steve O'Hara-Smith" <steveo@eircom.net>, David Wolfskill <david@catwhisker.org>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: symlink(2) [Was: Re: tcsh.cat] Message-ID: <200108311836.f7VIaog15767@green.bikeshed.org> In-Reply-To: Message from Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> of "Sat, 01 Sep 2001 03:17:54 %2B1000." <20010901031439.A4397-100000@besplex.bde.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> wrote: > On Fri, 31 Aug 2001, Brian F. Feldman wrote: > > > Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> wrote: > > > Here's an example of a standard utility being clueless about symlinks to > > > nothing: > > > > > > $ ln -s '' foo > > > $ cp foo bar > > > cp: foo is a directory (not copied) > > > > > > foo is certainly not a directory. The bug seems to be in fts. > > > > No, "foo" certainly _is_ a directory. It is precisely the same thing as > > ".". > > No, the empty pathname has been invalid and not an alias for "." since at > least the first version of POSIX. I didn't read the rest of the thread til later ;) The fact remains that FreeBSD interprets it as such in namei(), and is it not an undefined behavior according to POSIX? -- Brian Fundakowski Feldman \ FreeBSD: The Power to Serve! / green@FreeBSD.org `------------------------------' 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?200108311836.f7VIaog15767>