Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 22 Jul 2001 22:23:58 +1000 (EST)
From:      Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
To:        Joshua Goodall <joshua@roughtrade.net>
Cc:        freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: flags on symlinks
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.21.0107222210480.25554-100000@besplex.bde.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0107220851520.4671-100000@elm.phenome.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 22 Jul 2001, Joshua Goodall wrote:

> Is there a particular reason why there's no capability for setting flags
> on symlinks? the chflags syscall uses namei with FOLLOW, and changing this
> to NOFOLLOW allows chflags(2) to Do What I Want (i.e. SF_IMMUTABLE on a
> VLNK)
> 
> is there a filesystem train crash awaiting me for doing this, or am I in
> the clear? I realise it changes the semantics of chflags(1) so an
> alternative syscall or a follow/nofollow boolean addition to struct
> chflags_args is better than this hack.

There should be a separate lchflags syscall for this.  Obtain it from
NetBSD.  Several utilities need to be updated to handle flags on symlinks.
I'm not sure if NetBSD has implemented this.

The hack is probably fairly safe.

Bruce


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0107222210480.25554-100000>