Re: POSIX message queues, libmqueue: mq_open, mq_unlink

[Alex Riesen]

Chris Wright, Sat, Apr 17, 2004 00:22:17 +0200:
> > My concern is that the tests are rather pointing that something in
> > kernel is not implemented correctly. _The_ checks in particular.
> > Because if they _are_ implemented correctly, you don't need to patch the
> > functionality in the user space.
> >
> > And if the kernel code does check the incoming arguments correctly,
> > what is the point to check them again? Just to make the point, that
> > passing in not an absolute path is not portable?
> 
> The kernel interface is simple and clean.  And in fact, requires no
> slashes else you'll get -EACCES.  It's not POSIX, but the library
> interface is.
> 
> We just discussed this yesterday:
> 
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=108205593100003&r=1&w=2

now, what's is the check in the library for? BTW, it is returning the
other error code (EINVAL instead of EACCES), just on top of all the
confusion with slashes.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/