https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=73301 --- Comment #3 from Steven Stewart-Gallus <sstewartgallus00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- On further reflection, this is not a problem with the documentation of symlink, symlinkat, link and linkat but a problem with the documentation of ENOENT and what a nonexisting directory actually means. I suppose how one might describe the situation is that when a directory is unlinked from a filesystem (but still has process references to it) it enters a zombie state where many filesystem calls become inappropriate to use on it. I'm not sure where such documentation should be placed. We already have shm_overview(7), mq_overview(7) and such; and I think if we had a dir_overview(7) that would be the perfect place to put this corner case. dir_overview(7) might be too big project for not really any gain though. > I'd be willing to give it a shot, but, first,I'm not sure what if > anything to say about the symlink() case. Do you have a more > realistic example of that case? Nope. People should probably be able to figure that out from the description of the symlink case. I was just pointing it out for completeness and I'd be fine if that case was omitted. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching the assignee of the bug. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
