Re: (Fwd) ftw() not correctly handling symlinks

[Michael Kerrisk]

> As for your report: you completely misunderstand the difference
> between ftw() and nftw().  Especially why there is nftw() in the first
> place.

I've been reading the standards pretty closely, though as I mentioned, it 
seems to me that XSH:ftw() is not completely clear on this point (i.e. 
whether or not ftw() should follow symlinks - the implication of a XBD 
4.11 is that unless otherwise stated, it should, however the presence of 
the FTW_SL flag for ftw() implies otherwise).  

I tested the sample program I already sent you on OSF/1-5.1a - it gives 
the reults I expected - i.e. symbolic links are NOT followed, and ftw() 
passes FTW_SL to the helper function when it encounters a symlink.

So I think there is a question of who misunderstands the standards - you, 
or me and the folk at Compaq/ex-Digital (and I'm quite prepared to allow 
it could be the latter - like I say, it ain't clear)

Here's a simple way to resolve the point: In what circumstances (if any)  
will/should glibc:ftw() pass FTW_SL as a value to flag?

Michael

__________________________________________
Michael Kerrisk
mailto: address@hidden

It is good to collect things, but it is better to go on walks

                    Anatole France