[PATCHES] glibc 2.1, Linux, and chown
Richard Henderson
rth@cygnus.com
Sat Dec 12 21:52:00 GMT 1998
On Sat, Dec 12, 1998 at 05:47:04PM -0800, Jim Pick wrote:
> I'm not really clear on why you felt that the alpha glibc doesn't need
> Joel's patches. Wouldn't it be a good thing if glibc 2.1 provided a
> chown() implementation on 2.0.x kernels that was compatible with the
> 2.1.x kernels?
I don't feel it is worth the effort.
Certainly Joel's patch won't work, since it is expecting the numbers
to change. What you would have to do is somehow probe for the existance
of lchown WITHOUT actually performing any action. Then, if it doesn't
exist, do the readlink loop thing.
And it doesn't even get Debian what they want -- it in fact achieves
the opposite.
It is simple enough for Debian to call lchown, and DTRT if it fails.
I don't see why glibc has to get involved at all.
r~
More information about the Libc-alpha
mailing list