On Mar 6 07:02, Eric Blake wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> According to Corinna Vinschen on 3/6/2008 6:45 AM:
> | SUSv3(*) says:
> |
> | [EISDIR]
> | The named file is a directory and oflag includes O_WRONLY or O_RDWR.
> | [ENOENT]
> | O_CREAT is not set and the named file does not exist; or O_CREAT is
> | set and either the path prefix does not exist or the path argument
> | points to an empty string.
> |
> | Given these descriptions, I can't see anything wrong with that Linux
> | behaviour.
>
> By those SUSv3 rules (which are identical to POSIX), open("t/",
> O_RDONLY|O_CREAT) when t does not exist falls under ENOENT, not EISDIR.
> In POSIX 2004, path resolution requires that if a trailing slash is
> present, resolution is performed as if by "t/.", making "t" a path prefix
> which is not present. And in the draft POSIX 200x, the wording has been
> made more explicit that when doing path resolution, if there is a trailing
> slash but the text before the slash does not name an existing directory,
> then it fails with ENOENT.
>
> But on Linux:
> Linux$ strace touch t/
> ~ [...]
> ~ open("t/", O_WRONLY|O_NONBLOCK|O_CREAT|O_NOCTTY, 0666) = -1 EISDIR (Is a
> directory)
But the flags are not O_RDONLY|O_CREAT. They are O_WRONLY|O_CREAT.
That's why this falls under EISDIR under SUSv3 rules, afaics.
Which chapter in the austin doc are you refering to? I can't find
this re-wording for some reason.
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
