-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I've noticed that Jim just committed a patch based on a bug originally reported through the debian tracker without any additional mention here:
http://git.sv.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=coreutils.git;a=commit;h=c0c8685 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=343652 But regarding the patch, I'm wondering if an Austin Group interpretation is needed here. The next draft for POSIX has already tightened the wording to make it clear that rename("dir", "newdir/") must fail with ENOTDIR if newdir is not already a directory. Likewise, it clarifies that 'mv dir newdir/' must fail (oops - coreutils 6.10 doesn't do that). However, I still don't see any clarification on whether the Linux behavior of rename("symlink-to-dir/", "newname") failing with ENOTDIR is valid. Meanwhile, would it be worth subscribing bug-coreutils to the debian bug feed list? That way, this list would see bugs as they are reported, and others besides Jim will be able to chime in with advice. - -- Don't work too hard, make some time for fun as well! Eric Blake [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Cygwin) Comment: Public key at home.comcast.net/~ericblake/eblake.gpg Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHm3eo84KuGfSFAYARAvdMAKCT/iwkMwEROIDD0tbHquDGYCQCIwCeJ4NA dHNQQ1bC/uw0tsiyUfdaDLg= =/rb7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list Bug-coreutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
