Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Jeff King wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 10:42:26AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>>> I am leaning to think that it would be the least surprising if we treat as
>>> if /bin/ls does not even exist if /bin is not searchable. If /bin/ls is
>>> unreadable or unexecutable but /bin is searchable, then we _know_ it
>>> exists, and we follow the usual exec*p() rule to ignore it
> [...]
>> That sounds sensible to me. I think it involves writing our own
>> execvp, though, right?
>
> If I understood Junio correctly, then checking for ENOENT and EACCES
> should be enough.
>
> Example: when I try
>
> :; mkdir $HOME/cannotread
> :; chmod -x $HOME/cannotread
> :; echo nonsense >$HOME/bin/cat
> :; chmod -x $HOME/bin/cat
> :; PATH=$HOME/cannotread:$HOME/bin/cat:/usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin
> :; cat /etc/fstab
>
> the shell uses /bin/cat without complaint.
Yeah, but I think that the case Peff is worried about is:
$ >~/bin/nosuch
$ nosuch
nosuch: Permission denied
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html