[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: bin/55815: tar opens device files
The following reply was made to PR bin/55815; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Martin Husemann <martin%duskware.de@localhost>
Subject: Re: bin/55815: tar opens device files
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 10:19:16 +0100
On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 10:10:43AM +0100, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> > Those should be the default then, or maybe check (is there a mount flag
> > or something in statvfs?) whether any ACLs or ext attrs could be there at
> > all.
> That would be the ostrich approach of ignoring that open with side
> effects is fundamentally a bad idea. It also doesn't match what other
> tar implementations do and violates POLA just as well.
I agree that device open having an effect on the state of the device is
a bad thing in general, but it has been the case in Unix since the beginning,
or am I misremembering something? At least it was that way when dealing with
all tapes I ever dealt with.
But besides that: if there *could* be no extattr or ACL on the file system
(like I *knew* for sure for the case at hand, it was an anciend FFSv1
file system way too old for any of that) and making that information
available (like with a mount flag or a fs superblock flag or whatever) -
why is skipping the unneccessary open in that case an ostrich aproach?
Or why would it violate POLA? I would call it a smart optimization instead,
and would be very suprised to see thousands of totally unneeded open()
Main Index |
Thread Index |