public inbox for cygwin@cygwin.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ken Brown <kbrown@cornell.edu>
To: "cygwin@cygwin.com" <cygwin@cygwin.com>
Subject: Re: Odd, is it not? mkdir 'e:\' cannot be undone by rmdir 'e:\' ...
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 19:51:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <f77b318f-0c52-4b5f-3738-ff882804e84a@cornell.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e438666b60ee08a2a3ee4ca16015382f@smtp-cloud9.xs4all.net>

On 9/1/2019 1:38 PM, Houder wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Aug 2019 11:54:27, Houder  wrote:

[...]

> As the directory "/foo" had been correctly created, I turned to
> path_conv::check(), which is called when build_fhname() creates
> the path_conv object (also called pc) -- see dtable.cc.
> 
> Examining this (obsure) method in path.cc, I corrected the code
> in 2 places:
> 
> ---
>        if (dev.isfs ())
>          {
>            //if (strncmp (path, "\\\\.\\", 4)) <==== 1171
>            if ( ! strncmp (path, "\\\\.\\", 4)) // <==== [1]
>              {
>                if (!tail || tail == path)
>                  /* nothing */;
>                else if (tail[-1] != '\\')
>                  *tail = '\0'; <==== Ah! (you should not do that!)
>                else
>                  {
>                    error = ENOENT;
>                    return;
>                  }
>              }
> 
> [1] this code should be executed only if path == '\\.\' !!

I don't agree with your analysis here.

First, the strncmp() call is testing whether path *starts with* '\\.\', not 
whether path == '\\.\'.  For example, path might be a UNC device name like 
'\\.\c:'.  Second, as the original code indicates (before your correction), we 
do *not* want to execute the code in that case, since we might be mutilating the 
device name or incorrectly setting ENOENT.

On the other hand, I agree that there's something wrong with that code snippet. 
Comparing tail with path [which is the class member this->path] makes no sense 
here, because tail is a pointer into path_copy.  So I think line 1173 should read

	      if (!tail || tail == path_copy)

If this condition fails, then it's legitimate to refer to tail[-1] two lines later.

Observe next that path_copy contains no backslashes, so I think line 1175 should 
probably be

	      else if (tail[-1] != '/')

I don't immediately see why we would then set *tail = '\0' in this case, because 
I think *tail is already 0 if we get here and tail[-1] != '/'.  But maybe I'm 
missing something.

I need to think about this further, but I wanted to write down my initial 
thoughts before your bug report gets forgotten.

To be continued.

Ken

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-09-19 18:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-08-27 15:25 Houder
2019-08-27 16:28 ` Corinna Vinschen
2019-08-27 17:01   ` Houder
2019-08-27 17:32     ` Vince Rice
2019-08-27 17:50       ` Corinna Vinschen
2019-08-28  7:16       ` Houder
2019-08-28  9:22         ` john doe
2019-08-28 11:47           ` Houder
2019-08-28 13:22         ` Corinna Vinschen
2019-08-28 14:16           ` Eric Blake
2019-08-28 14:22             ` Corinna Vinschen
2019-08-28 15:18               ` Corinna Vinschen
2019-08-29 15:19                 ` Houder
2019-08-30  8:20                   ` Corinna Vinschen
2019-08-30 12:42                   ` Houder
2019-09-01 17:38                     ` Houder
2019-09-02  8:15                       ` Corinna Vinschen
2019-09-03  8:40                         ` Houder
2019-09-03  6:50                       ` Andrey Repin
2019-09-19 19:51                       ` Ken Brown [this message]
2019-09-20  9:11                         ` Houder
2019-09-20 18:20                           ` Houder
2019-09-21 16:07                             ` Ken Brown
2019-09-22  7:34                               ` Houder
2019-09-22 14:12                                 ` Ken Brown
2019-09-07  3:47                 ` L A Walsh
2019-08-27 19:48   ` Achim Gratz
2019-08-27 20:58     ` Brian Inglis
2019-08-28  7:16       ` Corinna Vinschen
2019-08-27 22:21     ` Achim Gratz
2019-08-28 13:36 ` Eric Blake
2019-08-28 22:57   ` Houder

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=f77b318f-0c52-4b5f-3738-ff882804e84a@cornell.edu \
    --to=kbrown@cornell.edu \
    --cc=cygwin@cygwin.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).