This is the mail archive of the
libc-hacker@cygnus.com
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Should we have MAXSYMLINKS?
- To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl@lucon.org>
- Subject: Re: Should we have MAXSYMLINKS?
- From: Tom Eastep <eastep@loc1.tandem.com>
- Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 16:43:16 +0000
- CC: GNU C Library <libc-hacker@cygnus.com>
- Organization: Compaq Computer Corporation, Tandem Division
- References: <m100oH5-00038dC@ocean.lucon.org>
"H.J. Lu" wrote:
>
> > > > is. If you are concerned about number of nested symlinks (traversed
> > > > without eating new components of name) - it's 5.
> > >
> >
> > It must be at least 8 (_POSIX_SYMLINK_MAX) for POSIX compatibility.
> > Values >= 20 are typical of other implementations.
> >
>
> Which POSIX standatd is _POSIX_SYMLINK_MAX in? Ulrich, do we support
> it?
>
> Thanks.
>
> H.J.
It was introduced in POSIX.1a. I'm assuming that 1a was actually adopted
(but I may be wrong); all I have here is one of the drafts...
-Tom
--
Tom Eastep
Compaq Computer Corporation
Enterprise Computing Group
Tandem Division
tom.eastep@compaq.com
begin:vcard
n:Eastep;Tom
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
org:Compaq Computer Corporation;Tandem Division
adr:;;;;;;
version:2.1
email;internet:tom.eastep@compaq.com
x-mozilla-cpt:;-6528
fn:Tom Eastep
end:vcard