On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 12:34:27AM +0300, Sami Kerola wrote:
> On 21 August 2014 22:28, Bernhard Voelker <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 08/21/2014 08:03 PM, Sami Kerola wrote:
> >> Earlier the mountpoint(1) followed symlinks
> >
> > IMO this is correct as symlinks only have to be treated
> > as such when explicitly not de-referencing.
> > As mountpoint(1) does not have a --no-dereference option,
> > symlinks should always be transparent for this tool.
> >
> > Furthermore, the patch would break scripts relying on existing
> > behavior:
> >
> > $ ln -s / slink
> >
> > $ /usr/bin/mountpoint slink
> > slink is a mountpoint
> >
> > $ # ~berny/util-linux/mountpoint slink
> > slink is not a mountpoint
>
> I don't share view symlinks are mount points. In my mind they are
> pointers, much like street signs, giving a direction to somewhere without
> understanding what is there if anything at all. But not breaking
> existing behavior is good point, so I changed the patch and added
> --no-dereference.
I don't think we need the patch, it does not resolve or improve
anything. It's over-engineering. If you don't like symlinks then you
can use
if [ ! -L $dir ]; then
mountpoint $dir
fi
> - if (stat(spec, &st)) {
> + if (lstat(spec, &st)) {
btw, you want to use lstat() only when no_dereference is specified.
Anyway, NACK. Sorry.
Karel
--
Karel Zak <kzak@xxxxxxxxxx>
http://karelzak.blogspot.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
