On Mar 6 16:27, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Mar 6 14:56, Eric Blake wrote: > > Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin <at> cygwin.com> writes: > > > > > > > > But the flags are not O_RDONLY|O_CREAT. They are O_WRONLY|O_CREAT. > > > > I still think Linux is wrong - t/ is not an existing directory, so you > > can't > > claim that an attempt was made to open an existing directory with O_WRONLY. > > > > But I guess it is a bit ambiguous, since if t/ did exist, then opening t/. > > should indeed fail with EISDIR; at any rate, it is certainly more efficient > > to > > blindly reject O_WRONLY due to the trailing slash without even checking for > > the > > existence of t. > > In our case I added a special case to emit EISDIR, otherwise we would > get ENOENT automatically (that's what STATUS_OBJECT_NAME_INVALID gets > converted to). However, I'm somewhat puzzled that you used that bash > example: > > $ : > t/ > bash: t/: Is a directory. > > If what you said is right, and if I revert the change to fhandler.cc, > we would get a ENOENT in that case, too. And given your arguments, > that should be correct. > > Do you agree?
I should add that I'm still rather leaning towards the Linux behaviour. I tested this on Solaris 10, and it behaves again different. In both examples open(2) returns with ENOTDIR. 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/
