Re: permission denied on exec of unexistent file?

From: Wakko Warner (wakko@animx.eu.org)
Date: Sat Mar 25 2000 - 18:42:18 EST

  • Next message: Linda Walsh: "Re: Endless overcommit memory thread."

    Saw the same thing in Zsh on my laptop. I tried to execute something I knew
    didn't exist (randomly hitting letters on keyboard) and get permission
    denied. I was root at the time.

    > In the /bin/blah case, bash has a fully-qualified command
    > name to work with, so it doesn't have to do a path search.
    > Rather, it proceeds directly to doing a stat or open on the
    > file which for some reason fails with an EPERM (I'm not going
    > to argue whether that's right or wrong without perusing the source).
    >
    > In the second case, bash must do a path search, so it does
    > stats on /path/blah for every path in your PATH. Since those
    > all fail, it prints that fact - i.e. command not found. Two
    > different mechanisms resulting in two different but understandable
    > error messages.
    >
    > I think the argument could be made either way. Some might
    > see this as two completely different scenarios, since one
    > involves a path search and one doesn't. Others might expect,
    > as it seems you do, that the base of the "problem" is really
    > the same, so the error messages should be the same. I can't
    > say as I really have a strong opinion either way. But I
    > figured it might help if we understand from whence cometh
    > the difference...
    >
    >
    > tw
    >
    >
    >
    > On 03/25/2000 22:12 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
    > >> On Sat, Mar 25, 2000 at 09:50:58PM +0200, Oleg Drokin wrote:
    > >> > Hello!
    > >> >
    > >> > I just found something that looks somewhat weird:
    > >> > mordor:~$ /bin/nonexistent_binary
    > >> > bash: ./nonexistent_binary: Permission denied
    > >> > mordor:~$ nonexistent_binary
    > >> > bash: nonexistent_binary: command not found
    > >>
    > >> Some issue here (smae kernel, same bash)
    > >>
    > >> > Shouldn't first attempt also say "command not found"?
    > >>
    > >> It should.
    > >>
    > >> > BASH_VERSION='2.03.0(1)-release'
    > >> > I'm running 2.3.99-pre3
    > >>
    > >> Seems to be related to the fs/exec.c changes in pre3
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> Christoph
    > >>
    > >> --
    > >> Always remember that you are unique. Just like everyone else.
    > >>
    > >> -
    > >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    > >> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
    > >> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
    > End of included message
    >
    >
    >
    > --
    > +--------------------------+------------------------------+
    > | Tim Walberg | tewalberg@mediaone.net |
    > | 828 Marshall Ct. | www.concentric.net/~twalberg |
    > | Palatine, IL 60074 | |
    > +--------------------------+------------------------------+

    -- 
     Lab tests show that use of micro$oft causes cancer in lab animals
    

    - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Mar 25 2000 - 18:37:45 EST