On Sun, Jun 18, 2006 at 12:40:43PM -0700, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > Well, the patch as sent in does seem sane, as long as glibc doesn't start
> > defaulting to the insane behaviour. Giving users the _ability_ to link to
> > the symlink target is certainly not wrong, regardless of any standard.
> > Doing it by default is another matter.
>
> I do not intend to change the link implementation in glibc. That would
> be majorly stupid, it'd break the ABI.
>
> The AT_SYMLINK_FOLLOW flag to linkat was the result of the discussion
> how to resolve the issue of the conflict between POSIX and the Linux
> implementation of link (BTW: the Solaris link syscall behaves the same
> as Linux's).
... while FreeBSD still doesn't have that 4.2BSD bug fixed, the suckers.
> This is an easy an non-intrusive way to help people who
> depend on the questionable POSIx-mandated behavior to work around the
> incompatiblity. Nothing more. Don't change the link syscall, don't
> assume the glibc will be changed. This is only one little extra bit of
> new functionality.
*shrug*
Fine by me; it's not really useful, but it's not a serious bloat either.
ACKed-by: Al Viro <[email protected]>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]