so today i gave it a shot again and put a debug output right before the ‘$RM
“$cfgfile”’. For some reason RM is set to ‘/bin/rm’ only. no ‘-f’. i’ll try to
figure out where that might come from.
anyway, thx for the hint :)
> On May 8, 2016, at 8:57 PM, Christian <christianre...@gmx.net> wrote:
>
> thx Eric for taking a look at my patch.
>
> it seems to be a good idea to use ‘rm -f’ and i also think it looks like $RM
> should already be set to ‘rm -f’. but i don’t get why it should fail than.
> what i’ll do next is check if $RM really is set to ‘rm -f’ using a debug
> print. couldn’t do it right now, just in case it might be set different for
> some reason.
>
>> On May 6, 2016, at 7:48 AM, Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 05/05/2016 11:22 PM, Christian wrote:
>>> So i found that if you’re running ‘./configure’ on a project that depends
>>> on
>>> libtool, it might happen that the script will end up with the following
>>> error:
>>> “/bin/rm: cannot remove 'libtoolT': No such file or directory”. I did some
>>
>>>
>>> cfgfile=${ofile}T
>>> trap "$RM \"$cfgfile\"; exit 1" 1 2 15
>>> - $RM "$cfgfile"
>>> + if test -e "$cfgfile" ; then
>>> + $RM "$cfgfile"
>>> + fi
>>
>> That's a TOCTTOU data race. Wouldn't it be better to just use 'rm -f'?
>> In fact, isn't $RM supposed to be including -f automatically?
>>
>> --
>> Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266
>> Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
>>
>
