On 22/06/16 14:47, P. Benie wrote: > On Wed, 22 Jun 2016, Bernhard Voelker wrote: > >> On 06/22/2016 02:48 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote: >>> On 22/06/16 13:18, Bernhard Voelker wrote: >>>> Unfortunately, it seems we don't have test for fts.c, do we? >>> >>> Not that I know of. >>> For effective testing of this you'd have to use something like cmocka, >>> or more generically something like CharybdeFS >> >> For rm(1), we could add a gdb-based or LD_PRELOAD-based test. Current rm(1) >> will fail to remove a recursive directory (because some files beneath the >> directory hierarchy didn't get deleted) > > It was a recursive rm that made me start looking at this condition. > Attached, please find the LD_PRELOAD that I used to simulate my buggy NFS > server. > >> Obviously, many other packages usig FTS like find(1) are also affected. > > On the plus side, the fts programs are much easier to fix. > > My investigations show that readdir error checks in general are are rarely > done, and if they are done, they are often done incorrectly. One program > went into an infinite loop if readdir failed (it assumed that readdir > would always make some progress each time) and another claimed that > readdir doesn't report errors, which I doubt is true on any platform. > > Peter >
Cool, I'll add that test in your name to coreutils. thanks, Pádraig
