: ... and SUS2 doesn't mention names ending with "." as a possible reason
: for failure. Weird. Anyway, I think that (a) no matter which policy we
: will take it should be done in VFS (*not* in filesystems - see your
: example with lofs) and (b) we may need a generic mechanism for dealing
: with such stuff.
: What about adding a boolean vector to the struct task and adding a
: new syscall:
: int POSIX_lossage(...)
I do not understand why you insist on uglifying Linux.
As I mentioned already, POSIX does *not* require this.
Even stronger, the current version does not even allow you
to return EINVAL.
Neither rmdir(2) nor rmdir(1) have any restrictions on "." or names
ending in ".".
Andries
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/