From: "Bill Stoddard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 11:17 AM
> > It's the responsibility of
> > dir walk/file walk to resolve symlinks to their target, so
> > we shouldn't have to test APR_LNK.
>
> Cool! Didn't recognise this.
That is my personal opinion. My directory_walk rework basically _always_
performs a (required) lstat - first. If that lstat returns a link, either
the stat is retrieved and owners are compared, or the request is denied.
If it returns a file/directory, then it can go on it's merry way, and doesn't
care that we didn't do an actual stat.
There is a secondary issue. Any apr_dir_open/read should retrieve lstat's
first, so we can decide how to resolve them. It takes the onus off of the
ap_sub_request_lookup_dirent() to go back and check for a symlink. If we
pass ap_sub_request_lookup_dirent() a specific file, it should be from lstat(),
never stat(). Of course ap_sub_request_lookup_file() has to go through the
entire set of gyrations, but that's why I created the optimized case :)
I'll dig out the directory_walk patch and post it again this early this week
(this time, as a patch). Note we _really_ need the caching optimizations before
we can consider it production quality, but I'd like to simply get it committed
and drop the back-asswards get_file_info pre-step.
Bill
