In a word, no. I can't blame anyone for suspecting that there's yet
another hidden flag somewhere, given our track record, but there's nothing
hidden on this one, there's just no code to implement O_NOFOLLOW. This
isn't Posix, and we just never put it in. This would be a reasonable thing
to have, so if you feel strongly enough about it to open an RFE, go for it.
yuri
From: "Knister, Aaron S. (GSFC-606.2)[COMPUTER SCIENCE CORP]"
<[email protected]>
To: gpfsug main discussion list <[email protected]>,
Date: 07/21/2016 09:05 AM
Subject: [gpfsug-discuss] GPFS API O_NOFOLLOW support
Sent by: [email protected]
Hi Everyone,
I've noticed that many GPFS commands (mm*acl,mm*attr) and API calls (in
particular the putacl and getacl functions) have no support for not
following symlinks. Is there some hidden support for gpfs_putacl that will
cause it to not deteference symbolic links? Something like the O_NOFOLLOW
flag used elsewhere in linux?
Thanks!
-Aaron_______________________________________________
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
_______________________________________________
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
