Re: rm && opensolaris && ntfs-3g problem

[Jim Meyering]

"Andras Barna" <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 6:56 PM, Jim Meyering <address@hidden> wrote:
...
>> That suggests that the opensolaris ntfs support for unlinkat
>> doesn't work as documented.  That unlinkat call is succeeding,
>> yet I presume there is a non-empty directory named "l" that it
>> fails to remove.
>>
>> There are two differences in how unlinkat is used between
>> coreutils and /usr/bin/rm:
>>  - coreutils uses "0" as the third argument, and /bin/rm uses 0x1
>>    (which is probably AT_REMOVEDIR)
>>  - coreutils uses AT_FDCWD as the first argument, and /bin/rm
>>    uses a file descriptor.
>>
>> Since Solaris is where openat-style functions originated, I'm
>> surprised that their ntfs implementation would not adhere to the
>> documented specification.
>
> what you mean under "their ntfs implementation"?
> i thought we talk about ntfs-3g
> hint: http://ntfs-3g.org/

Sorry for the imprecision.
Obviously, I meant "the ntfs-3g" driver code, since
this seems to be ntfs-3g specific.  It'd be good to know
if it is also specific to Solaris, and what precise version(s)
of ntfs-3g are affected, if only to document the problem
for people who encounter this in the future.

For the record, can you tell us what versions you know to be affected?

>> I do not plan to make GNU rm work around this bug.
>
> sorry for reporting it

What I should have said is that working around this
system-and-file-system-specific bug in coreutils/gnulib would not be easy,
and would probably have a negative impact all other systems.  However,
if someone can come up with a patch that is low-impact and safe looking,
I'll be happy to look at it.

I'm hoping we can ignore it, i.e., because the bug is only
in versions that few will use.