Hi Johannes, On Jul 4 20:38, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Jul 4 17:45, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > [...] > > BTW a colleague and I were wondering whether we really want to set > > `errno=ENOTDIR` in `gen_full_path_at()` for empty paths when > > `AT_EMPTY_PATH` is _not_ specified. As far as we can tell, Linux sets > > `errno=ENOENT` in that instance. > > I wonder if that's really what you mean. gen_full_path_at() generates > ENOTDIR in two scenarios: > > - At line 4443, if Cygwin can't resolve dirfd into a valid directory. > > - At line 4450 if ... actually... never. Given that p is always > set to the end of the directory string copied into path_ret, it > can never be NULL. Looks like this check for !p is a remnant from > the past. We should remove it. > > The actual check for an empty path is done in line 4457, and this > results in ENOENT, as desired. > > So, by any chance, do you mean the situation handled in line 4443, > that is, returning ENOTDIR if dirfd doesn't resolve to a directory? > > Yeah, it slightly complicates the caller, but it's not exactly > wrong, given your patch. > > OTOH, this entire thing doesn't look overly well thought out. We try > to generate a full path in gen_full_path_at() and if it fails in > a certain way and AT_EMPTY_PATH is given, we basically repeat > trying to create a full path in the caller. Maybe some > streamlining would be in order...
I actually found some time, to do that. So I now have a counter proposal to your patch. I'll send the patch series in a minute. Would you mind to take a discerning look and, perhaps, give it a try, too? Thanks, Corinna
