Re: fchmodat(2) does support AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW now, no?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Elliott,

On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 04:15:27PM GMT, enh wrote:
> > Maybe we need to add a "C library/kernel differences" section?
> 
> what's your timeline for "currently interesting" vs "just historical"?

I guess the line is when systems that provide XXX are EOL.
I usually check Debian and RHEL versions for determining that.

> (though i guess whatever that is, Linux 6.6 is pretty new at less than
> 12 months old!)

Yup.  :)

> 
> >         $ grep -rh '^\.SS ' man | sort | uniq -c | sort | tail
> >               5 .SS glibc
> >               7 .SS Authors and copyright conditions
> >               8 .SS Address format
> >              11 .SS Ioctls
> >              11 .SS glibc notes
> >              12 .SS Socket options
> >              13 .SS /proc interfaces
> >              15 .SS ISO/IEC\~8859 alphabets
> >              51 .SS C library/kernel differences
> >              99 .SS Program source
> >
> > Would you mind preparing a patch?
> 
> if you just want the trivial removal of the incorrect sentence, sure
> ... if you want a whole new "C library/kernel differences" section

I prefer the latter: instead of removing and then documenting the
kernel/libc difference, I'd make it in a single commit, so that
git-blame(1) shows the history better.

> you're probably able to write that ... which is probably a good

I could...  I'd have to research a little bit for it.  Do you feel like
writing a draft with what you've found already, and I continue from it?

If you're busy or lazy, though, just let me know and I'll try to do it
from scratch myself.  :)

> juncture to point out that there's also a whole missing function ---
> there's no mention of lchmod() which seems to have been added in
> GLIBC_2.3.2 (yes, 22 years ago; not to be confused with 2.32 :-) ...
> except i don't think it _worked_ on Linux until glibc sha
> 6b89c385d8bd0700b25bac2c2d0bebe68d5cc05d in 2020? i don't know how you
> want to document that!).

You probably know that function much better than me.  If you want to
have a look at it, it'll be very welcome.  (But considering that we've
been waiting for several years, we're not in a hurry.)  :)

Have a lovely day!
Alex

-- 
<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Documentation]     [Netdev]     [Linux Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux