On Mon, 10 Nov 2025 at 11:58, Al Viro <[email protected]> wrote: > > If we go that way, do you see any problems with treating > osf_{ufs,cdfs}_mount() in the same manner? Yes, these are pathnames,
Hmm. In those cases, the ENAMETOOLONG thing actually does make sense -
exactly because they are pathnames.
So I think that in those two places using getname() is fairly natural
and gets us the natural error handling too. No?
Linus
