This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] Assume that O_NOFOLLOW is always defined
- From: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>
- To: Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval dot zanella at linaro dot org>, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
- Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2017 19:55:22 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Assume that O_NOFOLLOW is always defined
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- Authentication-results: ext-mx01.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com
- Authentication-results: ext-mx01.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=fweimer at redhat dot com
- Dkim-filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com 61B4E8E3EF
- Dmarc-filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 61B4E8E3EF
- References: <20170413141642.87B5E401B4727@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <b02b52d7-53b9-0521-3d3a-2ea5ff595c53@linaro.org>
On 04/13/2017 07:33 PM, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
- /* Check all three standard file descriptors. */
+ /* Check all three standard file descriptors. The O_NOFOLLOW flag
+ really paranoid but some people actually are. If /dev/null
This sentence sounds strange, shouldn't be 'The O_NOFOLLOW flag*is*
really paranoid
Yes, you are right, I will fix it.
Thanks,
Florian