Stephane CHAZELAS <stephane.chaze...@gmail.com> wrote, on 07 Jun 2017: > > 2017-06-07 12:41:52 +0200, Joerg Schilling: > > Stephane Chazelas <stephane.chaze...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Do you have an opinion on whether POSIX should allow the > > > expansion of globs not to include "." and ".." by default? > > > > The fact that some filesystems include "." and ".." in the readdir() > > output does not make these entries required by POSIX. > > > > In 1990, my "WOFS" did already make a directory a special zero byte sized > > file > > with link count "1" and readdir() does not return "." or ".." with WOFS. > > > > The ZFS people decided to fake "." and "..", but this is not required. > [...] > > Yes, it's hard to tell what behaviour one can rely on with the > current text. Is opendir(".") required to open the current > directory even if there's no "." entry in the current directory > (same for "..")? Is foo/./bar required to be the same as > foo/bar?
The answer to both of those question is yes. See XBD 4.13 Pathname Resolution. -- Geoff Clare <g.cl...@opengroup.org> The Open Group, Apex Plaza, Forbury Road, Reading, RG1 1AX, England