Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2013 00:28:00 -0500 From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com> To: Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx> Cc: libc-alpha <libc-alpha@...rceware.org>, musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: O_EXEC and O_SEARCH >>> And, as far as I observed, current linux man pages don't tell us >>> O_PATH|O_NOFOLLOW >>> behavior. Is this really intentional result? How do you confirmed? >> >> Yes, it seems intentional. O_PATH without O_NOFOLLOW would resolve the >> symbolic link and open a file descriptor referring to the target >> inode. O_PATH|O_NOFOLLOW opens a file descriptor to the symbolic link >> inode itself. As far as I can see, this behavior is desirable and >> intentional with O_PATH but wrong for O_SEARCH or O_EXEC. > > Hmm... Why? > It doesn't match linux man nor posix. So, I suggest to don't guess and discuss in LKML directly instead.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.