On Fri, 31 Aug 2001, Brian F. Feldman wrote:
> Bruce Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Fri, 31 Aug 2001, Brian F. Feldman wrote:
> >
> > > Bruce Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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?
See Garrett's reply. The empty pathname is certainly invalid when passed
from userland, but POSIX apparently requires it to "work" when it came
from a symlink to "". I concluded the rest of the thread that the POSIX
spec is natural, what a lot of namei()'s do, and wrong.
Bruce
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
