Daniel Phillips wrote: > > It won't, the open for "." is handled in the VFS, not the filesystem - > it will open the directory. (Without needing to be told it's a > directory via O_DIRECTORY.) If you do open("magicdev") you'll get the > device, because that's handled by magicdevfs. You really mean that "magicdev" is a directory and: open("magicdev/.", O_RDONLY); open("magicdev", O_RDONLY); would both succeed but open different objects? > I'm not claiming there isn't breakage somewhere, you break UNIX fundamentals. But I'm quite relieved now because I'm pretty sure that something like that will never go into the kernel. Ciao, ET. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Re: Why side-effects on open(2) are ... Edgar Toernig
- Re: Why side-effects on open(2) ... Alexander Viro
- Re: Why side-effects on open(2) ... Daniel Phillips
- Re: Why side-effects on open(2) ... Daniel Phillips
- Re: Why side-effects on open(2) ... Oliver Xymoron
- Re: Why side-effects on open(2) ... Edgar Toernig
- Re: Why side-effects on open(2) ... Daniel Phillips
- Re: Why side-effects on open(2) ... Daniel Phillips
- Re: Why side-effects on open(2) ... Edgar Toernig
- Re: Why side-effects on open(2) ... Daniel Phillips
- Re: Why side-effects on open(2) ... Edgar Toernig
- Re: Why side-effects on open(2) ... Daniel Phillips
- Re: Why side-effects on open(2) ... Marko Kreen
- Re: Why side-effects on open(2) ... Horst von Brand
- Re: Why side-effects on open(2) are evil. (was Re: [RFD w/... Oliver Xymoron
- Re: Why side-effects on open(2) are evil. (was Re: [RFD w/... Alexander Viro