On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 9:46 AM, Bert Huijben <[email protected]> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Paul Burba [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: woensdag 7 april 2010 15:27 >> To: Bert Huijben >> Cc: Julian Foad; [email protected]; [email protected] >> Subject: Re: r877014 - on Windows, invalid path => svn_node_none [was: svn >> commit: r930333 - /subversion/branches/1.6.x/STATUS] > >> Bert...don't kill me, but where in either r877014 or my alternative >> patch are we returning an error we didn't return before? > > Before r877014 we returned an error on paths as "C:\path\that\is:invalid", > but we didn't return an error on an equally invalid path "//q:" (format is > "//server/share" or "q:/") that happens to return ERROR_BAD_PATHNAME instead > of ERROR_INVALID_NAME because it is handled in another layer of the Windows > path redirector. > > So what I tried to say is that the APR_STATUS_IS_ENOENT() and > APR_STATUS_IS_ENOTDIR() checks catch almost every path syntax error, but not > this specific one. I fixed this by also handling this error like the other > bad pathnames. An equally valid (or possibly better) route is to handle all > these invalid path errors as an error.
Thanks Bert, That makes r877014 clear (and compelling) particularly when combined with Julian's doc patch, which I see he just committed. Sorry for the confusion. Paul
