Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Geoff Clare said in the austin-group-l list: > > | This one is debatable. Step 2c says that when "file" is a > | If attempting to remove one of the names returned by readdir() > | results in an ENOENT error, then it could be argued that the name > | was not an "entry contained in file" at that point, and therefore > | an implementation which ignores the error would still conform to > | the requirements of step 2c. > > which was more or less my point of view.
That argument applies to ENOENT, but I don't see why it applies to ESTALE. ESTALE could be caused by a lot of things other than file removal, e.g., the remote file system was unexported. See <http://nfs.sourceforge.net/> and search for ESTALE to see more examples. _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
