delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/2001/09/24/10:12:31

Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2001 17:07:53 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Charles Sandmann <sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu>
cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Win 2000 rm -rf disaster info
In-Reply-To: <10109241344.AA15449@clio.rice.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010924170342.27314D-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Mon, 24 Sep 2001, Charles Sandmann wrote:

> >   rm: directory djgpp.2/gnu/gcc-3.03/build.djg/i586-pc-msdosdjgpp/libstdc_/src/libs/libstdc_.lax/recycled' is write protected; descend into it anyway?
> > 
> > So it thinks those fake directories are ``write-protected''...
> 
> recycled is write protected, but I did not get a similar message for
> the next directory...

I get this message for _all_ directories it ``finds''.

> This particular version of Windows you get lucky - but if someone
> sets lfn=n on Windows and does an rm -rf in the wrong spot you nuke the
> hard drive?  Documentation isn't good enough for that, we *MUST* put
> a check and a fix in, even if it bloats chdir and makes it slow.

I agree.  I was describing what I saw in the hope it will add another 
data point, not to argue that we can leave this issue alone.

> > It's different here: I, too, am dumped in the lower directory, but
> > running DJGPP programs _does_ work, and those programs behave as if
> > they were in the root.  For example, `ls' prints the names of the
> > files in the root directory.  Unsetting LFN gets me back the normal
> > behavior, i.e. `ls' prints nothing (as the directory is empty).
> 
> Aren't you petrified that by setting an environment variable we treat
> a non-root directory as root on one of the most common OSes out there?

I am.  I am not arguing with you, I'm reporting what I saw on my system.

> By the way, I found no problems with number of levels, just with the
> short name length (fixed buffer size of 64 chars).

The deep nesting only shows in some specific system calls, I forget which 
ones (`rename'?)

- Raw text -


  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright © 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019