Re: MVFS results

[Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin at cygwin dot com>]

On Jul 17 01:17, Eric Blake wrote:
> Eric Blake <ebb9 <at> byu.net> writes:
> 
> > Does the fact that MVFS is including the trailing NUL in fsname.Length, but 
> > ro_u_mvfs is not, relevant to RtlEqualUnicodeString returning false, even 
> > though the two Buffers are identical over their MaximumLength?
> > 
> 
> Sure enough, your patch plus this one-liner is enough to make symlinks work on
> MVFS once again!
> 
> diff --git i/winsup/cygwin/globals.cc w/winsup/cygwin/globals.cc
> index ef17534..1cd6b19 100644
> --- i/winsup/cygwin/globals.cc
> +++ w/winsup/cygwin/globals.cc
> @@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ UNICODE_STRING _RDATA ro_u_uncp = _ROU (L"\\??\\UNC\\");
>  UNICODE_STRING _RDATA ro_u_mtx = _ROU (L"mtx");
>  UNICODE_STRING _RDATA ro_u_csc = _ROU (L"CSC-CACHE");
>  UNICODE_STRING _RDATA ro_u_fat = _ROU (L"FAT");
> -UNICODE_STRING _RDATA ro_u_mvfs = _ROU (L"MVFS");
> +UNICODE_STRING _RDATA ro_u_mvfs = _ROU (L"MVFS\0");
>  UNICODE_STRING _RDATA ro_u_nfs = _ROU (L"NFS");
>  UNICODE_STRING _RDATA ro_u_ntfs = _ROU (L"NTFS");
>  UNICODE_STRING _RDATA ro_u_sunwnfs = _ROU (L"SUNWNFS");

Can we be sure that every version of MVFS has this obvious bug in
the name?  I'd rather replace the following line in mount.cc,
fs_info::update() (~line 246):

  && !is_mvfs (RtlEqualUnicodeString (&fsname, &ro_u_mvfs, FALSE))

with

  && !is_mvfs (RtlEqualUnicodePathPrefix (&fsname, &ro_u_mvfs, FALSE))

This checks for a MVFS prefix instead of equality of the entire string.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple