This tripped up the `docbook-dtds` `%post` in my experiments
with doing rpm-ostree for buildroots.
I cloned and built [xfstests](https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfstests-dev.git)
but haven't yet investigated actually running it.
In the meantime let's do the obvious fix here; we need to distinguish
between "copyup enabled" and "actually did a copyup" in the open path
at least, since if we didn't do a copyup we don't need to re-open.
Closes: #1396
Approved by: jlebon
We use utimens instead of utime, thus allowing nanosecond timestamps,
and also fixes a bug where we used to passed UTIME_OMIT to tv_nsec
which made the entire operation a no-op.
Closes: #1351
Approved by: cgwalters
This ends up a lot better IMO. This commit is *mostly* just
`s/glnx_close_fd/glnx_autofd`, but there's also a number of hunks like:
```
- if (self->sysroot_fd != -1)
- {
- (void) close (self->sysroot_fd);
- self->sysroot_fd = -1;
- }
+ glnx_close_fd (&self->sysroot_fd);
```
Update submodule: libglnx
Closes: #1259
Approved by: jlebon
We added a `.dir-locals.el` in commit: 9a77017d87
There's no need to have it per-file, with that people might think
to add other editors, which is the wrong direction.
Closes: #1206
Approved by: jlebon
In the `O_RDONLY` case, we were calling `openat` without a mode
argument. However, it's perfectly legal (albeit unusual) to do
`open(O_RDONLY|O_CREAT)`. One such application that makes use of this is
`flock(1)`.
This was actually caught by `_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2`, and once we run
`rofiles-fuse` with `-f`, the message is clear:
```
*** invalid openat64 call: O_CREAT or O_TMPFILE without mode ***:
rofiles-fuse terminated
======= Backtrace: =========
/lib64/libc.so.6(+0x7c8dc)[0x7f36d9f188dc]
/lib64/libc.so.6(__fortify_fail+0x37)[0x7f36d9fbfaa7]
/lib64/libc.so.6(+0x10019a)[0x7f36d9f9c19a]
rofiles-fuse[0x401768]
...
```
Without `_FORTIFY_SOURCE`, the file gets created, but its mode is
completely random.
I ran into this while investigating
https://github.com/projectatomic/rpm-ostree/pull/1003.
Closes: #1200
Approved by: cgwalters
If you lchown("symlink") then we were incorrectly trying to chown the
symlink target, rather than the symlink itself. In particular, this cause
cp -a to fail for a broken symlink. Additionally, it was using the
symlink target when verifying writability, rather than the symlink
itself.
To fix this, we need pass AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW in these cases.
In general, the kernel itself will always resolve any symlinks for us
before calling into the fuse backend, so we should really never do any
symlink following in the fuse fs itself. So, we pro-actively add
NOFOLLOW flags to a few other places:
truncate:
In reality this will never be hit, because
the kernel will resolve symlinks before calling us.
access:
It seems the current fuse implementation never calls this
(faccessat w/AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW never reaches the fuse fs)
but if this ever is implemented this is the correct behaviour.
We would ideally do `chmod` but this is not implemented on current kernels.
Because we're not multi-threaded, this is OK anyways.
Further, our write verification wasn't correctly handling the case of hardlinked
symlinks, which can occur for `bare` checkouts but *not* `bare-user` which the
tests were using. Change to `bare` mode to verify that.
Closes: #1137
Approved by: alexlarsson
As $DEITY intended.
I was reading the `prepare-root.c` code and the indentation damage was
distracting. Squash tabs that have leaked into various places in the code. I
didn't yet touch the `src/libostree` bits as that has higher potential for
conflict.
Closes: #852
Approved by: jlebon
These allow us to avoid copying a lot of data around
in userspace. Instead we splice the data directly from
the fd to the destination fd.
Closes: #684
Approved by: cgwalters
Programs like `useradd` try to `open(/etc/passwd, O_RDWR)` to append,
which didn't work with rofiles-fuse. Thinking about this, I realized
that there's a simpler algorithm for "can we write to this file" which
is "does it have a hardlink count <= 1"?
Switching to this both drops complexity (we no longer need to keep a
hash table of files we created), and also lets useradd work.
Closes: #462
Approved by: jlebon
The program is called ro*files* and ostree creates physical
copies of directories, so changing them is fine.
I hit this when trying to do a copy checkout onto an rofiles-fuse
mount.
Closes: #368
Approved by: jlebon
I was getting a compilation error with the GCC hardening flags which
look for a missing mode with `O_CREAT`. The right fix here is to drop
`O_CREAT`, as truncate() should throw `ENOENT` if the file doesn't
exist.
While it's not strictly tied to OSTree, let's move
https://github.com/cgwalters/rofiles-fuse in here because:
- It's *very* useful in concert with OSTree
- It's tiny
- We can reuse OSTree's test, documentation, etc. infrastructure
One thing to consider also is that at some point we could experiment
with writing a FUSE filesystem for OSTree. This could internalize a
better equivalent of `--link-checkout-speedup`, but on the other hand,
the cost of walking filesystem trees for these types of operations is
really quite small.
But if we did decide to do more FUSE things in OSTree, this is a step
towards that too.
Simon McVittie
Colin Walters
Alexander Larsson
Jonathan Lebon
Giuseppe Scrivano