NotificationsYou must be signed in to change notification settings
Fork33.7k
Star70.4k

bpo-37612: always call linkat() from os.link(), if available#14843

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to ourterms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Closed

jo-he wants to merge2 commits intopython:mainfromjo-he:master

Closed

bpo-37612: always call linkat() from os.link(), if available#14843

jo-he wants to merge2 commits intopython:mainfromjo-he:master

+5 −8

Conversation

Copy link

Contributor

jo-he commentedJul 18, 2019•
edited by bedevere-bot
Loading

The issue with link() is, that POSIX does not define its behavior regarding symbolic links:

"If path1 names a symbolic link, it is implementation-defined whether link() follows the symbolic link, or creates a new link to the symbolic link itself."

And it is indeed implemented differently on e.g. Linux and NetBSD. So, it makes no sense to call link(), where linkat() is available.

https://bugs.python.org/issue37612

bpo-37612: always call linkat() from os.link(), if available

ae2e6e8

The issue with link() is that POSIX does not define its behaviorregarding symbolic links:"If path1 names a symbolic link, it is implementation-defined whetherlink() follows the symbolic link, or creates a new link to the symboliclink itself."And it is indeed implemented differently on Linux and NetBSD.

the-knights-who-say-ni added the CLA signed label

Jul 18, 2019

bedevere-bot added the awaiting review label

Jul 18, 2019

📜🤖 Added by blurb_it.

264bdad

Copy link

Contributor

gnprice commentedAug 1, 2019

As I understand it from your bpo report, the issue is that the behavior ofos.link doesn't match its documentation on some platforms (in particular Linux), and this fixes things so that it does.

In particular the actual behavior on such platforms makesfollow_symlinks=True useless, even when explicitly specified, so that's definitely a bug. (Also you located the relevant provision in POSIX and found that Linux's behavior here is perfectly compliant.)

That sounds like a good fix to me!

Would you add a test for it? See test_os.py, or perhaps test_posix.py if the test doesn't make sense to run on Windows.