Message-ID: <39983839.E5692C3D@softhome.net>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 20:19:37 +0200
From: Laurynas Biveinis <lauras AT softhome DOT net>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: lt,en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
CC: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: <limits.h> change for symlinks
References: <3997BA55 DOT 413E8CCD AT softhome DOT net> <2950-Mon14Aug2000192605+0300-eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> <39982526 DOT BD15241A AT softhome DOT net> <4331-Mon14Aug2000205622+0300-eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> I simply don't know who is right, but somehow I don't think Unix
> imposes limits of the number of symlinks to a file (which is what
> LINK_MAX and _POISX_LINK_MAX are about).

This is not number of symlinks to file. This is a number of how many 
symlinks you can encounter when processing a path. (link1 -> link2 -> etc...)
After I hit that maximum, I stop processing with ELOOP. This is probably
the easiest and the most widespread way to detect symlink loops. Sorry for
not being clear.

> Do you even need a maximum here?

Well, I don't want infinite loop in __solve_symlinks()...
I think I will get away with simple define in xsymlink.c, if it doesn't
matter.

Laurynas