On 2021-06-23 10:11:57 -0400, The Wanderer wrote: > On 2021-06-23 at 09:59, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > > On a Debian GNU/Linux 10 (buster) machine: > > > > $ ls -ld /etc/systemd > > drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 0 2021-04-19 09:40:41 /etc/systemd > > $ ls /etc/systemd > > ls: cannot open directory '/etc/systemd': No such file or directory > > > > Any explanation??? > > On a non-systemd machine, I get: > > $ ls -ld /etc/systemd/ > drwxr-xr-x 4 root root 4096 Jul 23 2019 /etc/systemd/ > $ ls /etc/systemd/ > system user > > It seems possible that the 4 vs. 3 may be notable. > > An empty directory will normally report 2: the '.' link from inside it, > and the named link from the parent directory. 4 here reflects the two > '..' links from the two visible subdirectories; 3 would indicate that > one of those four links is missing on your system, and depending on > which one that is, it seems possible that that could lead to misbehaviors.
These are systemd machines, and on the other machines on the network, I get 6. > It could be useful to check on this with other tools. For a start, what > does > > $ stat /etc/systemd/ > > report? File: /etc/systemd/ Size: 0 Blocks: 8 IO Block: 4096 directory Device: 17h/23d Inode: 118 Links: 3 Access: (0755/drwxr-xr-x) Uid: ( 0/ root) Gid: ( 0/ root) Access: 2021-04-19 09:40:10.717284464 +0200 Modify: 2021-04-19 09:40:41.893170056 +0200 Change: 2021-04-19 09:40:41.941169879 +0200 Birth: - The number of links is indeed strange. I also suppose that the size should not be 0. > Also, my first thought was to verify that ls is running the way you > think it is. What do the following commands give you? > > $ type ls > $ echo $LS_DEFAULT_OPTIONS $ type ls ls is /bin/ls $ echo $LS_DEFAULT_OPTIONS $ -- Vincent Lefèvre <vinc...@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)