On Jan 20 14:57, Ken Brown wrote:
> On 1/20/2020 4:56 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On Jan 17 16:10, Ken Brown wrote:
> >> Currently, opening a symlink with O_NOFOLLOW fails with ELOOP.
> >> Following Linux, the first patch in this series allows the call to
> >> succeed if O_PATH is also specifie
On 1/20/2020 4:56 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Jan 17 16:10, Ken Brown wrote:
>> Currently, opening a symlink with O_NOFOLLOW fails with ELOOP.
>> Following Linux, the first patch in this series allows the call to
>> succeed if O_PATH is also specified.
>>
>> According to the Linux man page for
On Jan 17 16:10, Ken Brown wrote:
> Currently, opening a symlink with O_NOFOLLOW fails with ELOOP.
> Following Linux, the first patch in this series allows the call to
> succeed if O_PATH is also specified.
>
> According to the Linux man page for open(2), "the call returns a file
> descriptor refe
Currently, opening a symlink with O_NOFOLLOW fails with ELOOP.
Following Linux, the first patch in this series allows the call to
succeed if O_PATH is also specified.
According to the Linux man page for open(2), "the call returns a file
descriptor referring to the symbolic link. This file descrip
