I feel the same way about this. It can help in deep trees.
> On Mon, Sep 04, 2017 at 11:43:56AM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> > Thoughts?
>
> The PATH_MAX check was introduced in rev 1.10 1997/09/23. That was
> after the doumentation, so it might be a mistake that the man page
> was not updated.
>
> The feature worked for 20 years, I see no reason to remove it.
>
> Personally I prefer to see the error when something goes wrong.
>
> bluhm
>
> > Index: usr.bin/readlink/readlink.c
> > ===================================================================
> > RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/readlink/readlink.c,v
> > retrieving revision 1.27
> > diff -u -p -r1.27 readlink.c
> > --- usr.bin/readlink/readlink.c 9 Oct 2015 01:37:08 -0000 1.27
> > +++ usr.bin/readlink/readlink.c 4 Sep 2017 15:57:47 -0000
> > @@ -64,14 +64,6 @@ main(int argc, char *argv[])
> > if (argc != 1)
> > usage();
> >
> > - n = strlen(argv[0]);
> > - if (n > PATH_MAX - 1) {
> > - fprintf(stderr,
> > - "readlink: filename longer than PATH_MAX-1 (%d)\n",
> > - PATH_MAX - 1);
> > - exit(1);
> > - }
> > -
> > if (fflag) {
> > if (realpath(argv[0], buf) == NULL)
> > err(1, "%s", argv[0]);
>
