Messages in this thread |  | | From | Andy Lutomirski <> | Date | Sun, 30 Apr 2017 21:52:37 -0700 | Subject | Re: new ...at() flag: AT_NO_JUMPS |
| |
On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 9:10 AM, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote: > On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 09:38:22PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > >> It sounds more like AT_NO_ESCAPE ... or AT_BELOW, or something. > > I considered AT_ROACH_MOTEL at one point... Another interesting > question is whether EXDEV would've been better than ELOOP. > Opinions?
In support of my homeland, I propose AT_HOTEL_CALIFORNIA.
How about EXDEV for crossing a mountpoint and ELOOP for absolute symlinks or invalid ..? (Is there a technical reason why the same AT_ flag should trigger both cases?)
--Andy
|  |