Martin Pitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I do not see the issue for mkfifo -- what can possibly go wrong with > open()ing and fchmod()ing a freshly created FIFO?
If mkfifo opens the FIFO for reading, and some other process then opens the FIFO for writing without O_NONBLOCK, the other process will assume that the FIFO is ready for business and has a reader, even though it doesn't really. Anyway, this issue is no longer relevant for mkfifo or mknod. coreutils 6.1 mkfifo does not use chmod (or fchmod or lchmod or whatever). So its mkfifo is "safe" (in the sense described in the original bug report), and the patch is irrelevant for it. Likewise for mknod. Only mkdir is still "unsafe". _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list Bug-coreutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
