[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH] Bindings to *at functions & allowing more functions to opera

From: rob piko
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Bindings to *at functions & allowing more functions to operate on ports
Date: Tue, 4 May 2021 18:58:45 -0400

Hello Maxime,

> * Use O_NOFOLLOW to *not* follow the symbolic link.
>  Patch for adding O_NOFOLLOW to guile:

According to the man pages for the O_NOFOLLOW:

If the trailing component (i.e., basename) of pathname is
              a symbolic link, then the open fails, with the error
              ELOOP.  Symbolic links in earlier components of the
              pathname will still be followed.

Sounds like O_NOFOLLOW would not fix the issue if the symlink is found in other parts of the pathname outside of the basename?

Kostyantyn Kovalskyy

On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 7:18 AM <> wrote:
On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 10:19:20PM +0100, Maxime Devos wrote:
> Hi,
> [CC'ing some Guile and Guix maintainers because this is
> important for the security of Guix System.]

[snipped CC, since my answer is just a thankyou]

> I want to explain why these patches (and the O_FLAGS (*)
> patch) should be included in Guile [...]


This from someone striving to make Guile the "default tool for
around the house".

 - t

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]