Fix relative symlink handling in write_atomic - #17362
Open
cuishuang wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
Signed-off-by: cuishuang <imcusg@gmail.com>
Collaborator
|
r? @weihanglo rustbot has assigned @weihanglo. Use Why was this reviewer chosen?The reviewer was selected based on:
|
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What does this PR try to resolve?
Fixes #17361.
cargo_util::paths::write_atomicfollows symlinks before performing an atomic write. However,fs::read_linkreturns a relative target exactly as stored in the symlink.The returned target was previously used directly, causing subsequent filesystem operations to interpret it relative to Cargo's process working directory. This could make the write fail or overwrite an unrelated file.
This change resolves the target against the symlink's parent directory:
Path::joinpreserves absolute targets, so the existing behavior for absolute symlinks is unchanged.How to test and review this PR?
A new unit test creates a symlink with a relative target in a directory different from the process working directory. The test verifies that:
I ran:
All 12 unit tests and the
cargo-utildoc-test passed.