I have test the following on Windows and Linux:
$ cd /usr/../../
We should handle this correctly.
1 Single dot in the path can be removed safety. (except the first one. e.g.
2 Every double dot may need a removal of the last part of the path. (except the
first one. e.g. ../local)
And if there are not enough part left, keep the last part as it is.
We can even make it easier by adding step 0: make sure path is an absolute path.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bruce Momjian" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "William ZHANG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <email@example.com>
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2005 11:15 AM
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Bug in canonicalize_path()
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > > But what about "usr/local/../../.."?
> > What about it? The case of /usr/local/../../.. is handled correctly,
> > and the case where it's an underspecified relative path doesn't seem
> > that interesting to me --- certainly that is not so important that we
> > should get the wrong answer on cases that *are* plausible.
> > Most of the uses of canonicalize_path are on paths that are required to
> > be absolute, anyway.
> > It wouldn't be too implausible to error out if pending_strips>0 after
> > exiting the loop.
> I figured it would be best to leave it alone if we can't process it, but
> if you think it is more imporant to trim in cases like ../.., go ahead.
> Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
> email@example.com | (610) 359-1001
> + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
> + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?