Re: Review Request 45002: Added FTS_PHYSICAL option to fts_open for rmdir.

[Jojy Varghese]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/45002/
---

(Updated March 24, 2016, 1:34 a.m.)


Review request for mesos, Jie Yu and Neil Conway.


Changes
---

review addressed.


Repository: mesos


Description
---

According to the documentation for fts_open, either FTS_PHYSICAL or FTS_LOGICAL
SHOULD be provided. We need FTS_PHYSICAL for the case of rmdir as we dont want
to resolve the symlink targets while deleting them.


Diffs (updated)
-

  3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/posix/rmdir.hpp 
cbc97596cd8ed1e6d4261568fd0086c86e063232 
  3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/tests/os/rmdir_tests.cpp 
5bd154e40c6b45e74967b620141cc373bdee 

Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/45002/diff/


Testing
---

make check.


Thanks,

Jojy Varghese

Re: Review Request 45002: Added FTS_PHYSICAL option to fts_open for rmdir.

[Neil Conway]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/45002/#review125167
---




3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/tests/os/rmdir_tests.cpp (line 268)


`os::touch` would be a bit more readable, I think.


- Neil Conway


On March 24, 2016, 1:07 a.m., Jojy Varghese wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/45002/
> ---
> 
> (Updated March 24, 2016, 1:07 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Jie Yu and Neil Conway.
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> According to the documentation for fts_open, either FTS_PHYSICAL or 
> FTS_LOGICAL
> SHOULD be provided. We need FTS_PHYSICAL for the case of rmdir as we dont want
> to resolve the symlink targets while deleting them.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/posix/rmdir.hpp 
> cbc97596cd8ed1e6d4261568fd0086c86e063232 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/tests/os/rmdir_tests.cpp 
> 5bd154e40c6b45e74967b620141cc373bdee 
>   src/tests/containerizer/provisioner_appc_tests.cpp 
> 23a5b1059b4d9fde1e4a1aab5cd4fa6d05862332 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/45002/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> make check.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jojy Varghese
> 
>

Re: Review Request 45002: Added FTS_PHYSICAL option to fts_open for rmdir.

[Jojy Varghese]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/45002/
---

(Updated March 24, 2016, 1:07 a.m.)


Review request for mesos, Jie Yu and Neil Conway.


Changes
---

review addressed.


Repository: mesos


Description
---

According to the documentation for fts_open, either FTS_PHYSICAL or FTS_LOGICAL
SHOULD be provided. We need FTS_PHYSICAL for the case of rmdir as we dont want
to resolve the symlink targets while deleting them.


Diffs (updated)
-

  3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/posix/rmdir.hpp 
cbc97596cd8ed1e6d4261568fd0086c86e063232 
  3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/tests/os/rmdir_tests.cpp 
5bd154e40c6b45e74967b620141cc373bdee 
  src/tests/containerizer/provisioner_appc_tests.cpp 
23a5b1059b4d9fde1e4a1aab5cd4fa6d05862332 

Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/45002/diff/


Testing
---

make check.


Thanks,

Jojy Varghese

Re: Review Request 45002: Added FTS_PHYSICAL option to fts_open for rmdir.

[Cong Wang]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/45002/#review125121
---



Not related to your patch, but it also makes sense to add FTS_NOSTAT flag to 
speed up? We don't need statp anyway.

- Cong Wang


On March 18, 2016, 12:16 a.m., Jojy Varghese wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/45002/
> ---
> 
> (Updated March 18, 2016, 12:16 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Jie Yu and Neil Conway.
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> According to the documentation for fts_open, either FTS_PHYSICAL or 
> FTS_LOGICAL
> SHOULD be provided. We need FTS_PHYSICAL for the case of rmdir as we dont want
> to resolve the symlink targets while deleting them.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/posix/rmdir.hpp 
> cbc97596cd8ed1e6d4261568fd0086c86e063232 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/tests/os/rmdir_tests.cpp 
> daa46e05d113fd62ea9dad042ec41aaab28ad003 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/45002/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> make check.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jojy Varghese
> 
>

Re: Review Request 45002: Added FTS_PHYSICAL option to fts_open for rmdir.

[Cong Wang]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/45002/#review125120
---


Ship it!




Ship It!

- Cong Wang


On March 18, 2016, 12:16 a.m., Jojy Varghese wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/45002/
> ---
> 
> (Updated March 18, 2016, 12:16 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Jie Yu and Neil Conway.
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> According to the documentation for fts_open, either FTS_PHYSICAL or 
> FTS_LOGICAL
> SHOULD be provided. We need FTS_PHYSICAL for the case of rmdir as we dont want
> to resolve the symlink targets while deleting them.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/posix/rmdir.hpp 
> cbc97596cd8ed1e6d4261568fd0086c86e063232 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/tests/os/rmdir_tests.cpp 
> daa46e05d113fd62ea9dad042ec41aaab28ad003 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/45002/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> make check.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jojy Varghese
> 
>

Re: Review Request 45002: Added FTS_PHYSICAL option to fts_open for rmdir.

[Jie Yu]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/45002/#review125066
---


Fix it, then Ship it!





3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/posix/rmdir.hpp (line 50)


+1 on adding a comments about why FTS_PHYSICAL is needed.


- Jie Yu


On March 18, 2016, 12:16 a.m., Jojy Varghese wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/45002/
> ---
> 
> (Updated March 18, 2016, 12:16 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Jie Yu and Neil Conway.
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> According to the documentation for fts_open, either FTS_PHYSICAL or 
> FTS_LOGICAL
> SHOULD be provided. We need FTS_PHYSICAL for the case of rmdir as we dont want
> to resolve the symlink targets while deleting them.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/posix/rmdir.hpp 
> cbc97596cd8ed1e6d4261568fd0086c86e063232 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/tests/os/rmdir_tests.cpp 
> daa46e05d113fd62ea9dad042ec41aaab28ad003 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/45002/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> make check.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jojy Varghese
> 
>

Re: Review Request 45002: Added FTS_PHYSICAL option to fts_open for rmdir.

[Jojy Varghese]

> On March 20, 2016, 2:36 a.m., Neil Conway wrote:
> > Per discussion in https://reviews.apache.org/r/45003/, if we can actually 
> > run into `FTS_SLNONE`, we should have a test-case for it.

I dont think with FTS_PHYSICAL (and without FTW_COMFOLLOW) we will get 
FTS_SLNONE. I could be wrong but having a peek inside the glibc code for 
fts_open, I believe thats the case.


- Jojy


---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/45002/#review124434
---


On March 18, 2016, 12:16 a.m., Jojy Varghese wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/45002/
> ---
> 
> (Updated March 18, 2016, 12:16 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Jie Yu and Neil Conway.
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> According to the documentation for fts_open, either FTS_PHYSICAL or 
> FTS_LOGICAL
> SHOULD be provided. We need FTS_PHYSICAL for the case of rmdir as we dont want
> to resolve the symlink targets while deleting them.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/posix/rmdir.hpp 
> cbc97596cd8ed1e6d4261568fd0086c86e063232 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/tests/os/rmdir_tests.cpp 
> daa46e05d113fd62ea9dad042ec41aaab28ad003 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/45002/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> make check.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jojy Varghese
> 
>

Re: Review Request 45002: Added FTS_PHYSICAL option to fts_open for rmdir.

[Neil Conway]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/45002/#review124434
---



Per discussion in https://reviews.apache.org/r/45003/, if we can actually run 
into `FTS_SLNONE`, we should have a test-case for it.


3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/posix/rmdir.hpp (line 50)


This merits a comment explaining why we're setting `FTS_PHYSICAL`, I think.


- Neil Conway


On March 18, 2016, 12:16 a.m., Jojy Varghese wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/45002/
> ---
> 
> (Updated March 18, 2016, 12:16 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Jie Yu and Neil Conway.
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> According to the documentation for fts_open, either FTS_PHYSICAL or 
> FTS_LOGICAL
> SHOULD be provided. We need FTS_PHYSICAL for the case of rmdir as we dont want
> to resolve the symlink targets while deleting them.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/posix/rmdir.hpp 
> cbc97596cd8ed1e6d4261568fd0086c86e063232 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/tests/os/rmdir_tests.cpp 
> daa46e05d113fd62ea9dad042ec41aaab28ad003 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/45002/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> make check.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jojy Varghese
> 
>