Re: Bug in canonicalize_path()

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: William ZHANG <uniware(at)zedware(dot)org>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Bug in canonicalize_path()
Date: 2005-08-12 03:14:08
Message-ID: 22286.1123816448@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> But what about "usr/local/../../.."?

What about it? The case of /usr/local/../../.. is handled correctly,
and the case where it's an underspecified relative path doesn't seem
that interesting to me --- certainly that is not so important that we
should get the wrong answer on cases that *are* plausible.

Most of the uses of canonicalize_path are on paths that are required to
be absolute, anyway.

It wouldn't be too implausible to error out if pending_strips>0 after
exiting the loop.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2005-08-12 03:15:25 Re: Bug in canonicalize_path()
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2005-08-12 03:07:06 Re: Bug in canonicalize_path()