Mike Smith wrote:
> This is actually an interesting case.
I have some interesting clients. The reality of the matter is that their
filesystem organization on the server is terrible. This could all be
solved with a properly reorganized directory hierarchy - and that was my
first suggestion when they complained.
However, it'll be cheaper for me to tweak Samba than to correct their
disorganization, since they have apps that expect things to be in
certain places, and users who aren't terribly educated (or cooperative).
> The canonical answer is that you're wrong, and you should use stat(2) for
> this purpose.
That's why I gave the scenerio.
> However it's fair to assume that with ACLs entering the picture,
> access(2) may actually given you a better answer. I would poke the
> TrustedBSD people to be certain about this, though.
Another argument in favor of access() is that the fix (for the time
being) is:
if (!access(n,R_OK) ) continue;
Which is about the simplest tweak I've ever made to a program. stat()
would not take a lot more work, but being as lazy as I am, I'll use
access() now that I know it's safe in this situation.
I know nothing of ACLs, so you've just indicated that there's something
new I need to learn. I'm also going to have to get up to date with what
TrustedBSD is doing, as I haven't been watching them much.
Thanks for the feedback,
Bill
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
