On Thu, 28.05.15 21:03, Martin Pitt (martin.p...@ubuntu.com) wrote: > Hello Lennart, > > Lennart Poettering [2015-05-28 19:44 +0200]: > > On Wed, 27.05.15 10:07, Martin Pitt (martin.p...@ubuntu.com) wrote: > > > > > -int fd_is_mount_point(int fd) { > > > +int fd_is_mount_point(int fd, const char *parent) { > > > > Hmm, now I am confused? Why "parent"? > > > > I really think this should work as close as the usual *at() calls > > work. i.e. take a dir fd as first argument, and a filename > > *within*that*directory* to check. Maybe even give it the _at() suffix: > > > > int fd_is_mount_point_at(int fd, const char *filename, int flags); > > int path_is_mount_point(const char *path, int flags); > > > > path_is_mount_point() simply seperates the last part of the path, > > opens its parent directory, and then invokes fd_is_mount_point_at() > ^^^^^^ > > with the parent dir and the last component... > ^^^^^^ > > Exactly, that's why I called it "parent"; but I'm not fussed about the > name, "dir" or "containing_dir" would work as well. I'd just not call > it "filename" as that would be confusing -- this is *not* the file > name of fd, but the directory it lives in (i. e. fd's "parent" if you > will).
Now even more confused. I say: the fd parameter should refer to the directory, and the string parameter to the file name in that directory. But I really don't grok what you think it should refer to: what does the fd param refer to? the file itself, and the string parameter the path to the directory this is in? That'd be very weird, no? I am completely puzzled... Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel