Re: glob(3) GLOB_PERIOD bug?

[christos%astron.com@localhost (Christos Zoulas)]

In article <201302210230.VAA19897%Sparkle.Rodents-Montreal.ORG@localhost>,
Mouse  <mouse%Rodents-Montreal.ORG@localhost> wrote:
>
>If you want to argue that GLOB_NOMATCH is the correct behaviour for
>../? with GLOB_PERIOD set, fine, I'm willing to listen (though I'll
>take a lot of convincing, especially given what prompted me to add it
>in the first place; the semantics I wanted were "GLOB_PERIOD means
>leading dots are no longer in any way special").  But that's not what I
>see you arguing here.  What I see amounts to something akin to replying
>to "rename() crashes in this case!" with "No problem, it works fine in
>this other case!"

I see what you mean and I've removed the code in question.

Thanks,

christos