[bug #18175] GPG Signature Does Not Match Key

URL: Summary: GPG Signature Does Not Match Key Project: findutils Submitted by: None Submitted on: Thursday 11/02/2006 at 07:25 UTC Category: None Severity: 3 - Normal

Re: Problem with find + AFS + acl="l"

On Wed, 2006 Nov 01 20:58:21 +, James Youngman wrote: > > If we see a DT_UNKNOWN before anything else in a directory, we > wouldn't know whether to assume it's a directory or not, unless we had > previously seen a DT_DIR for "." or "..". I take it there's a good reason for not using scandir()

[bug #18174] [wishlist] Add "-type u" test for paths with unknown type

URL: Summary: [wishlist] Add "-type u" test for paths with unknown type Project: findutils Submitted by: iskunk Submitted on: Thursday 11/02/2006 at 04:55 Category: find

Re: Problem with find + AFS + acl="l"

On 11/1/06, Daniel Richard G. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Wed, 2006 Nov 01 18:42:34 +, James Youngman wrote: > > But my question is, does AFS guanrantee that readdir() will return > them in that order? It does appear that "." and ".." come first consistently, but is this really necessary?

Re: Problem with find + AFS + acl="l"

On Wed, 2006 Nov 01 18:42:34 +, James Youngman wrote: > > But my question is, does AFS guanrantee that readdir() will return > them in that order? It does appear that "." and ".." come first consistently, but is this really necessary? Ext3 itself doesn't do this. > >It'll know from the get-g

Re: Problem with find + AFS + acl="l"

On 11/1/06, Daniel Richard G. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Wed, 2006 Nov 01 15:19:44 +, James Youngman wrote: > > Perhaps I was unclear. find needs to know how to handle the first > DT_UNKNOWN entry when it sees it. (so does fts). IFF AFS guarantees > that a DT_DIR entry will be seen befo

Re: Problem with find + AFS + acl="l"

On Wed, 2006 Nov 01 15:19:44 +, James Youngman wrote: > > Perhaps I was unclear. find needs to know how to handle the first > DT_UNKNOWN entry when it sees it. (so does fts). IFF AFS guarantees > that a DT_DIR entry will be seen before the first DT_UNKNOWN entry, we > could automatically tu

Re: Problem with find + AFS + acl="l"

On 11/1/06, Daniel Richard G. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Wed, 2006 Nov 01 13:15:52 +, James Youngman wrote: [...] > IFF AFS has these properties: > 1. "." and ".." are returned first > 2. DT_DIR is returned for them > > ... then we could defer the lstat call until the point where we need

Re: Problem with find + AFS + acl="l"

On Wed, 2006 Nov 01 13:15:52 +, James Youngman wrote: > On 10/28/06, Daniel Richard G. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >I am using find(1) at an AFS site to produce file lists for indexing. > > Unfortunately you don't indicate which version. It would be very > useful if you did. This was 4.2.27

Re: Problem with find + AFS + acl="l"

On 11/1/06, James Youngman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: find uses lstat to determine if it shoud recurse into that entry. It assumes that entries for which DT_UNKNOWN was returned much be directories (since readdir didn't seem to know). Sorry. That should have been: find uses lstat to determ

Re: Problem with find + AFS + acl="l"

On 10/28/06, Daniel Richard G. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I am using find(1) at an AFS site to produce file lists for indexing. Unfortunately you don't indicate which version. It would be very useful if you did. [...] The current behavior of find(1) is problematic because in these restricte