"Andras Barna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 6:56 PM, Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... >> That suggests that the opensolaris ntfs support for unlinkat >> doesn't work as documented. That unlinkat call is succeeding, >> yet I presume there is a non-empty directory named "l" that it >> fails to remove. >> >> There are two differences in how unlinkat is used between >> coreutils and /usr/bin/rm: >> - coreutils uses "0" as the third argument, and /bin/rm uses 0x1 >> (which is probably AT_REMOVEDIR) >> - coreutils uses AT_FDCWD as the first argument, and /bin/rm >> uses a file descriptor. >> >> Since Solaris is where openat-style functions originated, I'm >> surprised that their ntfs implementation would not adhere to the >> documented specification. > > what you mean under "their ntfs implementation"? > i thought we talk about ntfs-3g > hint: http://ntfs-3g.org/
Sorry for the imprecision. Obviously, I meant "the ntfs-3g" driver code, since this seems to be ntfs-3g specific. It'd be good to know if it is also specific to Solaris, and what precise version(s) of ntfs-3g are affected, if only to document the problem for people who encounter this in the future. For the record, can you tell us what versions you know to be affected? >> I do not plan to make GNU rm work around this bug. > > sorry for reporting it What I should have said is that working around this system-and-file-system-specific bug in coreutils/gnulib would not be easy, and would probably have a negative impact all other systems. However, if someone can come up with a patch that is low-impact and safe looking, I'll be happy to look at it. I'm hoping we can ignore it, i.e., because the bug is only in versions that few will use. _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
