Hi, On Sat, Aug 02, 2025 at 09:33:15PM -0700, Collin Funk wrote: > Hi Eric, > > You said: > > > Among other things, I can see the following changes that coreutils > > will need to make to become compliant, or else we need to push back on > > the POSIX folks if we have strong reasons to complain that their > > specification will break things: > > > > POSIX wants 'readlink non-symlink' to output a diagnostic; that is, it > > looks like POSIX wants us to behave like '-v' is enabled by default > > (our current behavior of -q by default will be non-compliant). > > I have attached a patch that I think is correct for readlink. > > It is a bit more complex than just behaving the same as 'readlink -v' > previously would. This is because the behavior of non-POSIX > options. Here are some commands: > > $ touch file > $ ln -s symlink file > > # Example 1 > $ readlink -v file > readlink: file: Invalid argument > > # Example 2 > $ readlink -v -f file > /home/collin/file > > If 'readlink -v' where 'POSIXLY_CORRECT=1 readlink' then example 1 would > conform. I think that example 2 would violate POSIX.
Given that -f is not in POSIX, I don't see why the example 2 would violate it. > So, when POSIXLY_CORRECT is enabled we can call 'readlink', check for > errors, and then canonicalize if it is successful. I'd argue that such a change of readlink -e/-f/-m behaviour makes little sense as it defeats the purpose of these options. -- ldv
