Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!bloom-beacon!eru!hagbard!sunic!mcsun!hp4nl!mhres!squirrel!pronto!jv From: jv@mh.nl (Johan Vromans) Newsgroups: comp.unix.ultrix Subject: Re: ln -s gives wrong error message on Ultrix 4.1 Message-ID: <1991Apr11.080051.10756@pronto.mh.nl> Date: 11 Apr 91 08:00:51 GMT References: <1991Apr9.194356.24156@watcgl.waterloo.edu> Sender: jv@pronto.mh.nl (Johan Vromans) Reply-To: Johan Vromans Organization: Multihouse Automation, the Netherlands Lines: 33 In-Reply-To: idallen@watcgl.waterloo.edu's message of 9 Apr 91 19:43:56 GMT In article <1991Apr9.194356.24156@watcgl.waterloo.edu> idallen@watcgl.waterloo.edu (Ian! D. Allen [CGL]) writes: > For a nonexistent pathname "xxx" and a directory into which I do not > have permission to write "/", Ultrix issues the wrong error message: >... > 1% ln -s xxx / > xxx: No such file or directory <- What?! >... > The "No such file or directory" that Ultrix issues is not correct for #1. > The presence or absence of the link content should not affect the fact > that I don't have permission to make the symbolic link. It doesn't. In this case, you deserve two error messages: ENOENT *AND* EPERM. > Ultrix should say, like everyone else, "Permission denied". I do not agree. To me, it is more logical to check source first. If you do not have a (valid) source, there is no need worrying about the destination. But I can imagine that checking destination first also has it points. > (It should also put the command name "ln:" in the error messages.) I agree on this one. Johan -- Johan Vromans jv@mh.nl via internet backbones Multihouse Automatisering bv uucp: ..!{uunet,hp4nl}!mh.nl!jv Doesburgweg 7, 2803 PL Gouda, The Netherlands phone/fax: +31 1820 62911/62500 ------------------------ "Arms are made for hugging" -------------------------