Re: [bug #24949] coreutils pwd not implementing latest POSIX features

[Matthew Woehlke]

Paul D. Smith wrote:
> On the other hand, I think it would not actually be that difficult to
> implement -L.  It seems to me that Eric Blake's description of what it would
> take to adhere to the POSIX standard, as he describes here:
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2008-10/msg00258.html is more
> complicated than necessary.  We do not need to strip "." or ".." from the
> value of $PWD.  All we need to do is determine if the value of $PWD is (a) an
> absolute path, and (b) it refers to the current directory, and (c) it does not
> contain "." or ".." as filename elements.  Of these the only tricky bit AFAICS
> is (b); we would need to do something like compare the device/inode values of
> the directory pointed to by $PWD and the current directory to be sure they had
> the same value.  I'm not sure if glib provides this type of functionality.

It's entirely possible I'm missing something obvious, but what's wrong 
with comparing 'readlink -f $PWD' to 'command pwd'? (Obviously I mean 
the effects thereof, but the point is, isn't what you say might be 
"hard" already addressed by readlink?)

--
Matthew
Please do not quote my e-mail address unobfuscated in message bodies.
--
For great justice!! -- Captain (Zero Wing)