Interpretations

Answering questions that may arise related to the meaning of portions of an IEEE standard concerning specific applications.

IEEE Standards Interpretation for IEEE Std 1003.1™-2001 IEEE Standard Standard for Information Technology -- Portable Operating System Interface (POSIX®)

Copyright © 2006 by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. 3 Park Avenue New York, New York 10016-5997 USA All Rights Reserved.

Interpretations are issued to explain and clarify the intent of a standard and do not constitute an alteration to the original standard. In addition, interpretations are not intended to supply consulting information. Permission is hereby granted to download and print one copy of this document. Individuals seeking permission to reproduce and/or distribute this document in its entirety or portions of this document must contact the IEEE Standards Department for the appropriate license. Use of the information contained in this document is at your own risk.

IEEE Standards Department Copyrights and Permissions 445 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, New Jersey 08855-1331, USA

Interpretation Request #76
Topic: rename, final component dot or dot-dot Relevant Sections: XSH rename Page: 1232 Line: 38638

The rationale for rename(2), line 38727, states "Renaming dot or dot-dot is prohibited in order to prevent cyclical file system paths." However, nothing in the requirements mentions this restriction. Contrast this with rmdir(2), which explicitly forbids removing a pathname ending with a . or .. component.

Before line 38638, add a new paragraph: If either pathname argument refers to a path whose final component is either dot or dot-dot, rename() shall fail.

At line 38667, expand the EINVAL paragraph: The new directory pathname contains a path prefix that names the old directory, or either pathname argument contains a last component that is dot or dot-dot.

Interpretation Response #74
The standards states the requirements for rename(), and conforming implementations must conform to this. However, concerns have been raised about this which are being referred to the sponsor."

Rationale for Interpretation
None.