Re: rm -r sometimes produces errors under NFS

[Vincent Lefevre]

On 2007-03-15 16:26:52 -0700, Linda Walsh wrote:
[...]
>      I agree rm should report a failed "unlink", but if the "access"
> returns "ESTALE", shouldn't that be taken as a hint that the
> filename we are trying to access has been updated and that an
> "unlink" should not be attempted (because the filename is invalid?)

> Just a thought that might reduce error messages while still being POSIX
> compliant?

I agree with you, and IMHO, one can even say the same thing after the
unlink. Geoff Clare said in the austin-group-l list:

| This one is debatable.  Step 2c says that when "file" is a
| directory, "For each entry contained in file, other than dot or
| dot-dot, the four steps listed here (1 to 4) shall be taken with
| the entry as if it were a file operand."
|
| If attempting to remove one of the names returned by readdir()
| results in an ENOENT error, then it could be argued that the name
| was not an "entry contained in file" at that point, and therefore
| an implementation which ignores the error would still conform to
| the requirements of step 2c.

which was more or less my point of view.

-- 
Vincent Lefèvre <address@hidden> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.org/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.org/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / Arenaire project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)