From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21375 invoked by alias); 16 Jan 2012 12:32:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 21367 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Jan 2012 12:32:42 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from e06smtp13.uk.ibm.com (HELO e06smtp13.uk.ibm.com) (195.75.94.109) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 16 Jan 2012 12:32:28 +0000 Received: from /spool/local by e06smtp13.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Mon, 16 Jan 2012 12:32:26 -0000 Received: from d06nrmr1507.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com ([9.149.38.233]) by e06smtp13.uk.ibm.com ([192.168.101.143]) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; Mon, 16 Jan 2012 12:32:25 -0000 Received: from d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.37.228]) by d06nrmr1507.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id q0GCWPOG2388168 for ; Mon, 16 Jan 2012 12:32:25 GMT Received: from d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id q0GCWPjH024798 for ; Mon, 16 Jan 2012 05:32:25 -0700 Received: from tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com (tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com [9.152.85.9]) by d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVin) with SMTP id q0GCWN33024751; Mon, 16 Jan 2012 05:32:23 -0700 Message-Id: <201201161232.q0GCWN33024751@d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com> Received: by tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 16 Jan 2012 13:32:23 +0100 Subject: Re: [rfc v2][4/6] Readlink as file I/O target operation To: eliz@gnu.org Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 13:29:00 -0000 From: "Ulrich Weigand" Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <83hazzjw3x.fsf@gnu.org> from "Eli Zaretskii" at Jan 13, 2012 08:28:02 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit x-cbid: 12011612-2966-0000-0000-000002E82CEB Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-01/txt/msg00541.txt.bz2 Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 19:15:12 +0100 (CET) > > From: "Ulrich Weigand" > > @@ -36193,6 +36197,16 @@ error occurred. > > Delete the file at @var{pathname} on the target. Return 0, > > or -1 if an error occurs. @var{pathname} is a string. > > > > +@item vFile:readlink: @var{pathname} > > +Read value of symbolic link @var{pathname} on the target. Return > > +the number of bytes read, or -1 if an error occurs. > > This part is okay, but please don't use "pathname" when you really > mean "file name". GNU Coding Standards frown on using "path" or its > derivatives for anything but PATH-style directory lists. I'll be happy to use "filename" instead, but the currently existing packets (open, unlink) also use "pathname" today. Should those be changed to "filename" too? (B.t.w. note that those packets are directly related to the corresponding POSIX routines open/unlink/readlink -- the documentation of those routines, whether in POSIX itself or in the corresponding Linux man pages consistently refers to those arguments as "path" or "pathname" ... I'm wondering whether it is a deliberate decision on the part of the GNU Coding Standards to deviate from established terminology in that area?) Bye, Ulrich -- Dr. Ulrich Weigand GNU Toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell BE Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com