On Thu, 16 Nov 2000, Alexander Viro wrote:
> > This is a point I don't understand here : do you mean that they are
> > confused if they can rmdir "." but not if they can rmdir their cwd
> > differently ? What's the difference ?
>
> rmdir() is _not_ "kill the directory identified by name and remove all
> links to it". It's "remove a given link and .. in directory pointed
> by it, then schedule directory for removal".
Now I see your point : by "." or "foo/." you mean the directory itself,
while "foo" or "foo/" refer to the link to the directory, and they are
obviously different objects... at least since hard links on directories
were introduced. Fine.
> BTW, cwd is irrelevant - /tmp/foo/. would demonstrate the same behaviour.
We saw it, and found it shocking for the very same reasons...
> It becomes really obvious when you look at rename() - you act on links,
> not on inodes. The only reason why we could try to overload that for
> directories was that there is a special link - one from the parent.
> However, _finding_ said link in race-free way is extremely nasty.
> Especially for cases like /tmp/foo/. where /tmp/foo is a symlink to
> /tmp/bar/baz. AFAIK Linux was the only system that tried to be smart
> in that area. And that attempt was _not_ successful - there were rather
> interesting races around the thing.
Ok, now I get it. Thanks for this much clearer explanation.
I guess that this was not a problem in 2.2 precisely because hard links on
directories were forbidden, right ?
> Besides, we clearly violated
> all relevant standards - rmdir() and rename() are required to fail
> if the last component of name happens to "." or "..".
By standard, do you imply 'de facto' ? Or does any source clearly state
this ?
-- Jean-Marc Saffroy - Research Engineer - Silicomp Research Institute mailto:jms@migrantprogrammer.com- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 23 2000 - 21:00:11 EST