Problem Report 0022 Details

Help Show help | Quick Search | Click here to view your privileges

This page provides all information on Problem Report 0022.

Report 0022 Actions

    Problem Report Number 0022
    Submitter's Classification Test Suite problem
    State Resolved
    Resolution Test Suite Deficiency (TSD)
    Problem Resolution ID TSD.PX.0008
    Raised 2004-07-03 07:45
    Updated 2004-07-07 19:03
    Published 2004-07-07 19:03
    Product Standard 1003.1-2003 System Interfaces
    Certification Program POSIX Certified by IEEE and The Open Group
    Test Suite VSX-PCTS2003 version 1.0B
    Test Identification POSIX.os/files/rename/T.rename 1
    Problem Summary Rename test expects the wrong behavior for nonexistantdirectory/
    Problem Text Section 4.11 of the Base Definitions volume states "A pathname that
    contains at least one non-slash character and that ends with one or
    more trailing slashes shall be resolved as if a single dot character
    (?.?) were appended to the pathname"

    Therefore, rename("rename-t.1", "A/D1/") is resolved as
    rename("rename-t.1","A/D1/.") and should fail if D1 does not exist,
    since D1 is an intermediate component.
    Test Output /tset/POSIX.os/files/rename/T.rename 1 Failed

    Test Description:
    On a call to rename(old, new), the pathnames old and new are resolved
    in accordance with the requirements for pathname resolution.
    Posix Ref: Component RENAME Assertion 5.5.3.2-05(A)
    Posix Ref: Component RENAME Assertion 5.5.3.2-06(A)
    Posix Ref: Component RENAME Assertion 5.5.3.2-07(A)
    Posix Ref: Component RENAME Assertion 5.5.3.2-08(A)
    Posix Ref: Component RENAME Assertion 5.5.3.2-09(A)
    Posix Ref: Component RENAME Assertion 5.5.3.2-10(A)
    Posix Ref: Component RENAME Assertion 5.5.3.2-11(C)
    Posix Ref: Component RENAME Assertion 5.5.3.2-12(A)
    Posix Ref: Component RENAME Assertion 5.5.3.2-13(A)
    Posix Ref: Component RENAME Assertion 5.5.3.2-17(A)
    Posix Ref: Component RENAME Assertion 5.5.3.2-18(A)
    Posix Ref: Component RENAME Assertion 5.5.3.2-19(A)
    Posix Ref: Component RENAME Assertion 5.5.3.2-20(A)
    Posix Ref: Component RENAME Assertion 5.5.3.2-21(A)
    Posix Ref: Component RENAME Assertion 5.5.3.2-22(A)
    Posix Ref: Component RENAME Assertion 5.5.3.2-23(C)
    Posix Ref: Component RENAME Assertion 5.5.3.2-24(A)
    Posix Ref: Component RENAME Assertion 5.5.3.2-25(A)

    Test Strategy:
    CREATE directory hierarchy for pathname resolution using
    init_pathres()
    CREATE directory using crdir() with resolved pathname
    OBTAIN file status information using stat() for resolved pathname
    OBTAIN st_dev and st_ino for resolved pathname using stat()
    RENAME resolved pathname to unresolved pathname using rename()
    VERIFY that rename() returned successfully
    VERIFY that st_dev and st_ino for resolved pathname are the same as
    those of the unresolved pathname using stat()
    VERIFY that resolved pathname no longer exists using eaccess()
    OBTAIN st_dev and st_ino for unresolved pathname using stat()
    RENAME unresolved pathname to resolved pathname using rename()
    VERIFY that rename() returned successfully
    VERIFY that st_dev and st_ino for resolved pathname are the same as
    those of the unresolved pathname using stat()
    VERIFY that unresolved pathname no longer exists using eaccess()
    OBTAIN file status information using stat() resolved pathname
    VERIFY that st_dev and st_ino for resolved pathname are the same as
    those saved earlier
    REMOVE directory using remove()
    REMOVE directory hierarchy created by init_pathres using cln_pathres

    Test Information:
    rename("rename-t.1", "A/D1/") did not give correct results
    RETURN VALUES: expected: 0, observed: -1
    ERRNO VALUES: expected: 0 (NO ERROR), observed: 2 (ENOENT)
    rename("rename-t.1", "A/D1//") did not give correct results
    RETURN VALUES: expected: 0, observed: -1
    ERRNO VALUES: expected: 0 (NO ERROR), observed: 2 (ENOENT)
    rename("rename-t.1", "RelLinkToF/") did not give correct results
    RETURN VALUES: expected: 0, observed: -1
    ERRNO VALUES: expected: 0 (NO ERROR), observed: 2 (ENOENT)

    Review Information

    Review Type TSMA Review
    Start Date 2004-07-03 07:45
    Last Updated 2004-07-05 19:19
    Completed 2004-07-05 19:19
    Status Complete
    Review Recommendation Test Suite Deficiency (TSD)
    Review Response This issue has been discussed by the Austin Group and the consensus was
    that the behaviour of these rename() calls is unspecified. So the test
    is wrong to expect the calls to succeed, but it would also be wrong to
    expect the calls to fail. It should allow either behaviour.

    Review Type SA Review
    Start Date 2004-07-05 18:19
    Last Updated 2004-07-07 01:29
    Completed 2004-07-07 01:29
    Status Complete
    Review Resolution Test Suite Deficiency (TSD)
    Review Conclusion This PR represents an agreed test suite deficiency.

    Problem Reporting System Options:

     

    Back   

Contact the Certification Authority