OpenVZ Forum


Home » Mailing lists » Devel » [PATCH 1/3] lutimesat: simplify utime(2)
Re: [PATCH 1/3] lutimesat: simplify utime(2) [message #9878 is a reply to message #9876] Fri, 26 January 2007 23:35 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Arnd Bergmann is currently offline  Arnd Bergmann
Messages: 10
Registered: February 2006
Junior Member
On Friday 26 January 2007 21:41, Andrew Morton wrote:
> I'm somewhat surprised that this wasn't done earlier.  I wonder if there's
> some subtle reason why this won't work.   How well tested is this?

http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/000095399/functions/utim es.html
lists a slight difference between utime and utimes in the handling
of EPERM/EACCESS:

> The utimes() function shall fail if:
> [EACCES] Search permission is denied by a component of the path prefix;
> or the times argument is a null pointer and the effective user ID of the
> process does not match the owner of the file and write access is denied.
> [EPERM] The times argument is not a null pointer and the calling process'
> effective user ID has write access to the file but does not match the
> owner of the file and the calling process does not have the appropriate
> privileges.
>
> The utime() function shall fail if:
> [EACCES] Search permission is denied by a component of the path prefix;
> or the times argument is a null pointer and the effective user ID of the
> process does not match the owner of the file, the process does not have
> write permission for the file, and the process does not have appropriate
> privileges.
> [EPERM] The times argument is not a null pointer and the calling process'
> effective user ID does not match the owner of the file and the calling
> process does not have the appropriate privileges.

I don't really understand how that should be implemented in different
ways, but it might be the reason that we have separate functions.

Arnd <><

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: [PATCH] :EXT[3, 4] jbd layer function called instead of fs specific one
Next Topic: [PATCH -mm] sn2: use static ->proc_fops
Goto Forum:
  

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ] [ PDF ]

Current Time: Sun Dec 21 05:41:58 GMT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.18732 seconds
Powered by FUDforum Powered by Virtuozzo Containers