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

[Andras Barna]

On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 9:39 PM, Jim Meyering <address@hidden> wrote:
> "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?

it's the latest ntfs-3g
ok, let's say that ntfs-3g is buggy, these are bugs
- different versions of GNU rm behaves different?
- returns 0 but it not succeed
- again with rm 6.7 i can rm directories with -r but -rf

>
>>> 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.
>

really?
again: coreutils is integrated to opensolaris
see:http://opensolaris.org/os/community/arc/caselog/2007/048/

and GNU coreutils are used on other NON linux OS too, *bsd etc.

i thought that gnu is not limited to linux


-- 
Andy
http://blog.sartek.net