[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150403021516.GD6817@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2015 22:15:16 -0400
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: bug? in musl libc failed to preserve ownership for
On Thu, Apr 02, 2015 at 09:18:49PM -0400, Jean-Marc Pigeon wrote:
> Hello.
>
> Using cp (from native musl coreutils compilation, not busybox) I am
> getting a strange result when doing a copy
> (using musls-1.1.8)
>
> test (user:group, no privilege 301:300, doing this as root is no problem):
> ;-------------------------------------------------------------
> mkdir d1
> cd d1
> touch p1
> ln -s p1 lp1
> cd ..
> cp -a d1 d2
> cp: failed to preserve ownership for d2/lp1: Not supported
> ;--------------------------------------------------------------
> Note: same cp from coreutils glibc working fine.
>
> strace extract
>
> getdents64(3, /* 4 entries */, 2048) = 96
> getdents64(3, /* 0 entries */, 2048) = 0
> close(3) = 0
> lstat("d1/lp1", {st_mode=S_IFLNK|0777, st_size=2, ...}) = 0
> readlink("d1/lp1", "p1", 3) = 2
> symlink("p1", "d2/lp1") = 0
> lstat("d2/lp1", {st_mode=S_IFLNK|0777, st_size=2, ...}) = 0
> lchown("d2/lp1", 301, 300) = 0
> newfstatat(AT_FDCWD, "d2/lp1", {st_mode=S_IFLNK|0777, st_size=2, ...},
> AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW) = 0
> fcntl(1, F_GETFL) = 0x8002 (flags O_RDWR|O_LARGEFILE)
> writev(2, [{"cp: ", 4}, {NULL, 0}], 2cp: ) = 4
> writev(2, [{"", 0}, {"failed to preserve ownership for"..., 39}],
> 2failed to preserve ownership for d2/lp1) = 39
> writev(2, [{": Not supported", 15}, {NULL, 0}], 2: Not supported) = 15
> writev(2, [{"", 0}, {"\n", 1}], 2
> ) = 1
> lstat("d1/p1", {st_mode=S_IFREG|0644, st_size=0, ...}) = 0
> open("d1/p1", O_RDONLY|O_NOFOLLOW) = 3
> ;----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> My understanding/feeling, could be within fcntl not
> reading symlink file status properly. possible?
fcntl is unrelated; it's not acting on the symlink.
I've tried to make sense of the above strace but I don't see anything
in the source that would be causing the newfstatat syscall. The only
code paths I can find in the source that print that message just check
for failure of lchown, and lchown is not failing. I checked current
git master and 8.19 which I had lying around. What specific version
are you using?
Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
