From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: (qmail 26577 invoked from network); 12 Apr 2020 02:18:10 -0000 Received-SPF: pass (primenet.com.au: domain of zsh.org designates 203.24.36.2 as permitted sender) receiver=inbox.vuxu.org; client-ip=203.24.36.2 envelope-from= Received: from ns1.primenet.com.au (HELO primenet.com.au) (203.24.36.2) by inbox.vuxu.org with UTF8ESMTPZ; 12 Apr 2020 02:18:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 9211 invoked by alias); 12 Apr 2020 02:18:03 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Id: Zsh Workers List List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: X-Seq: 45679 Received: (qmail 16279 invoked by uid 1010); 12 Apr 2020 02:18:03 -0000 X-Qmail-Scanner-Diagnostics: from joooj.vinc17.net by f.primenet.com.au (envelope-from , uid 7791) with qmail-scanner-2.11 (clamdscan: 0.102.2/25772. spamassassin: 3.4.4. Clear:RC:0(155.133.131.76):SA:0(-1.9/5.0):. Processed in 3.707742 secs); 12 Apr 2020 02:18:03 -0000 X-Envelope-From: vincent@vinc17.net X-Qmail-Scanner-Mime-Attachments: | X-Qmail-Scanner-Zip-Files: | Received-SPF: none (ns1.primenet.com.au: domain at vinc17.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2020 04:17:22 +0200 From: Vincent Lefevre To: zsh-workers@zsh.org Subject: Re: glob qualifier '-' doesn't work correctly on dangling symlinks Message-ID: <20200412021722.GA1748686@zira.vinc17.org> Mail-Followup-To: zsh-workers@zsh.org References: <20200411151511.GA1708902@zira.vinc17.org> <20200411173450.56nnznxtmil5oge3@chazelas.org> <20200411191711.GA1722320@zira.vinc17.org> <20200411203714.wupg6wmd7b7xch2w@chazelas.org> <20200411234817.GA1737986@zira.vinc17.org> <20200412012155.7954a35f@tarpaulin.shahaf.local2> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20200412012155.7954a35f@tarpaulin.shahaf.local2> X-Mailer-Info: https://www.vinc17.net/mutt/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1+33 (6a74e24e) vl-117499 (2019-06-23) On 2020-04-12 01:21:55 +0000, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > To be explicit, then, the proposal is that «brokensymlink(-W)» and > «brokensymlink(-^W)» should both trigger the "no match" error? (I.e., > the target of a broken symlink is neither writable nor not writable.) Yes. > What should «brokensymlink(-)» do? Since no filtering is requested on the non-existing target of the symlink, this could give "brokensymlink", i.e. ignore the fact that "-" was used. However, one could decide that the use of "-" will immediately filter out broken symlinks. > What would be the glob qualifier syntax for broken symlinks? There would need something for that. But even currently, there are things one cannot do with glob qualifiers, such as one does not have a way to know the reason why a symlink is broken, which can be important when one is interested in broken symlinks. zira% ln -s /does-not-exist s1 zira% ln -s /root/foo s2 zira% ls -L s* ls: cannot access 's1': No such file or directory ls: cannot access 's2': Permission denied But with glob qualifiers, there does not seem to be a way to distinguish these two cases. -- Vincent Lefèvre - Web: 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)