summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd/0012-don-t-pass-AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW-flag-to-faccessat.patch
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd/0012-don-t-pass-AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW-flag-to-faccessat.patch')
-rw-r--r--meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd/0012-don-t-pass-AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW-flag-to-faccessat.patch99
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 99 deletions
diff --git a/meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd/0012-don-t-pass-AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW-flag-to-faccessat.patch b/meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd/0012-don-t-pass-AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW-flag-to-faccessat.patch
deleted file mode 100644
index 1a6db654f8..0000000000
--- a/meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd/0012-don-t-pass-AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW-flag-to-faccessat.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,99 +0,0 @@
-From 9621618c701a2d5eb3e26f40c68354d4dfb8f872 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
-From: Andre McCurdy <armccurdy@gmail.com>
-Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 14:33:30 -0700
-Subject: [PATCH 12/12] don't pass AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW flag to faccessat()
-
-Avoid using AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW flag. It doesn't seem like the right
-thing to do and it's not portable (not supported by musl). See:
-
- http://lists.landley.net/pipermail/toybox-landley.net/2014-September/003610.html
- http://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2015/02/05/2
-
-Note that laccess() is never passing AT_EACCESS so a lot of the
-discussion in the links above doesn't apply. Note also that
-(currently) all systemd callers of laccess() pass mode as F_OK, so
-only check for existence of a file, not access permissions.
-Therefore, in this case, the only distiction between faccessat()
-with (flag == 0) and (flag == AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW) is the behaviour
-for broken symlinks; laccess() on a broken symlink will succeed with
-(flag == AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW) and fail (flag == 0).
-
-The laccess() macros was added to systemd some time ago and it's not
-clear if or why it needs to return success for broken symlinks. Maybe
-just historical and not actually necessary or desired behaviour?
-
-Signed-off-by: Andre McCurdy <armccurdy@gmail.com>
----
-Upstream-Status: Pending
-
- src/basic/fs-util.h | 22 +++++++++++++++++++++-
- src/shared/base-filesystem.c | 6 +++---
- 2 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
-
-diff --git a/src/basic/fs-util.h b/src/basic/fs-util.h
-index 094acf179..cdbc0ae72 100644
---- a/src/basic/fs-util.h
-+++ b/src/basic/fs-util.h
-@@ -48,7 +48,27 @@ int fchmod_umask(int fd, mode_t mode);
-
- int fd_warn_permissions(const char *path, int fd);
-
--#define laccess(path, mode) faccessat(AT_FDCWD, (path), (mode), AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW)
-+/*
-+ Avoid using AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW flag. It doesn't seem like the right thing to
-+ do and it's not portable (not supported by musl). See:
-+
-+ http://lists.landley.net/pipermail/toybox-landley.net/2014-September/003610.html
-+ http://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2015/02/05/2
-+
-+ Note that laccess() is never passing AT_EACCESS so a lot of the discussion in
-+ the links above doesn't apply. Note also that (currently) all systemd callers
-+ of laccess() pass mode as F_OK, so only check for existence of a file, not
-+ access permissions. Therefore, in this case, the only distiction between
-+ faccessat() with (flag == 0) and (flag == AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW) is the
-+ behaviour for broken symlinks; laccess() on a broken symlink will succeed
-+ with (flag == AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW) and fail (flag == 0).
-+
-+ The laccess() macros was added to systemd some time ago and it's not clear if
-+ or why it needs to return success for broken symlinks. Maybe just historical
-+ and not actually necessary or desired behaviour?
-+*/
-+
-+#define laccess(path, mode) faccessat(AT_FDCWD, (path), (mode), 0)
-
- int touch_file(const char *path, bool parents, usec_t stamp, uid_t uid, gid_t gid, mode_t mode);
- int touch(const char *path);
-diff --git a/src/shared/base-filesystem.c b/src/shared/base-filesystem.c
-index 903a18786..2f6052ee7 100644
---- a/src/shared/base-filesystem.c
-+++ b/src/shared/base-filesystem.c
-@@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ int base_filesystem_create(const char *root, uid_t uid, gid_t gid) {
- return log_error_errno(errno, "Failed to open root file system: %m");
-
- for (i = 0; i < ELEMENTSOF(table); i ++) {
-- if (faccessat(fd, table[i].dir, F_OK, AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW) >= 0)
-+ if (faccessat(fd, table[i].dir, F_OK, 0) >= 0)
- continue;
-
- if (table[i].target) {
-@@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ int base_filesystem_create(const char *root, uid_t uid, gid_t gid) {
-
- /* check if one of the targets exists */
- NULSTR_FOREACH(s, table[i].target) {
-- if (faccessat(fd, s, F_OK, AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW) < 0)
-+ if (faccessat(fd, s, F_OK, 0) < 0)
- continue;
-
- /* check if a specific file exists at the target path */
-@@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ int base_filesystem_create(const char *root, uid_t uid, gid_t gid) {
- if (!p)
- return log_oom();
-
-- if (faccessat(fd, p, F_OK, AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW) < 0)
-+ if (faccessat(fd, p, F_OK, 0) < 0)
- continue;
- }
-
---
-2.14.2
-