Re: [Netatalk-devel] ls -a .AppleDB .AppleDesktop .AppleDouble

[didier <dga...@ma...>]

Hi,
Le vendredi 17 juillet 2009 à 10:21 +0200, Frank Lahm a écrit : 
> > unexpected results.
> 
> I've digested the expected error codes for most calls in the specs. A
> good match would be AFPERR_PARAM.
You can't trust the spec for this. Clients can do bad things, like
entering in a busy loop and asking the same stuff again and again, when
they receive an error code they don't like.     
> 
> Unfortunately not all afp_* funcs calling cname use get_afp_errno for
> the returned afperrno. They can be found with something like:
> $ grep -A 2 cname etc/afpd/*.c
> Most of them *cough* are in the ACL and EA funcs, but not all. We must
> fix all of these too .
> 
> > We could return Mac answers to ._xxx filename on an exported FAT volume.
> > At least they should have test this case.
> 
> What does Apples afpd return for this case?
I'm unable to make it work, it doesn't want to share a FAT volume or a
folder inside a FAT volume :(
 
If someone has a better luck.

> >> b) check_name now often will be called twice
> >

> > More than twice with mtoupath, ...
> 
> Ok, then lets take your route.
> 
> > ... for extenddir it's not too bad if it's
> > really a directory, once it's in the cache the call is not in the code
> > path, one issue is with dirlookup if called with a file cnid...
> 
> What issue?
It's call often, very often and sometime with a file cnid meaning it's
never added to our directories cache. But without numbers let forget
this for now.
> 
> >> a) is probably acceptable because only the unredeemed hacker will try
> >> this and see this error codes.
> >
> > Yes for .AppleXXX maybe not for veto files.
> 
> Not sure here. The client won't see the vetoed files in the first
> place and so if he begins poking around I'd call that hacking and he
> then may get what he deserves: unexpected errorcodes, hopefully
> crashing his Finder.
The culprit could be a software. 
> 
> However: as said imo returning AFPERR_PARAM is ok in any case.
Ok.
> 
> Are you working on this? I'd like to avoid doubled work.
Yes I am, are you removing the pap stuff?

Didier