Hi, Alle mercoledì 19 ottobre 2011, Thomas Schwinge ha scritto: > Just an oversight, or is there a reason to not changing > libnetfs/io-pathconf.c and term/users.c, too?
term/users.c already does that, it seems. About libnetfs/io-pathconf.c, I don't have an NF setup, but I guess the attached patch should do it (testing welcome!). -- Pino Toscano
From 2ad3fb8ec4969144536b0e1a877971abae4224c3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Pino Toscano <toscano.p...@tiscali.it>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 22:25:34 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] libnetfs: handle _PC_PATH_MAX in pathconf
Explicitly return -1 also for _PC_PATH_MAX to indicate there is no
limit for it, otherwise EINVAL is returned for it.
* libnetfs/io-pathconf.c (netfs_S_io_pathconf): Handle _PC_PATH_MAX
too.
---
libnetfs/io-pathconf.c | 1 +
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/libnetfs/io-pathconf.c b/libnetfs/io-pathconf.c
index 78244bc..2fd3f5b 100644
--- a/libnetfs/io-pathconf.c
+++ b/libnetfs/io-pathconf.c
@@ -39,6 +39,7 @@ netfs_S_io_pathconf (struct protid *user,
case _PC_PIPE_BUF:
case _PC_VDISABLE:
case _PC_SOCK_MAXBUF:
+ case _PC_PATH_MAX:
*value = -1;
break;
--
1.7.6.3
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
