Re: is_absolute_path incorrect on Windows
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Giles Lean <giles.lean@pobox.com>, Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2010-06-01T22:34:38Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Hm. Neither of these obviously exclude the case of an absolute path >> that happens to lead to cwd. I'm not sure how important that is, >> but still ... > We currently do that with path_is_prefix_of_path(). Maybe that needs to > be called as well. I think you misunderstood my point: in the places where we're insisting on a relative path, I don't think we *want* an absolute path to be accepted. What I was trying to say is that these proposed function names don't obviously mean "a relative path that does not try to break out of cwd". regards, tom lane