Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2006 03:59:01 -0600 From: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> To: Maxim Konovalov <maxim@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/ufs/ufs ufs_vnops.c Message-ID: <447EBA65.9000103@samsco.org> In-Reply-To: <200605311315.k4VDFUhD093628@repoman.freebsd.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
Maxim Konovalov wrote: > maxim 2006-05-31 13:15:29 UTC > > FreeBSD src repository > > Modified files: > sys/ufs/ufs ufs_vnops.c > Log: > o According to POSIX, the result of ftruncate(2) is unspecified > for file types other than VREG, VDIR and shared memory objects. > We already handle VREG, VLNK and VDIR cases. Silently ignore > truncate requests for all the rest. Adjust comments. > > PR: kern/98064 > Submitted by: bde > Security: local DoS > Regress. test: regression/fifo/fifo_misc > MFC after: 2 weeks > > Revision Changes Path > 1.276 +22 -4 src/sys/ufs/ufs/ufs_vnops.c If POSIX says that the result is undefined, wouldn't it be in our best interests to return EBADF instead of 0? Or would that break 3rd party software? Scotthome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?447EBA65.9000103>