Re: Bug in canonicalize_path()

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian  writes:
> > But what about "usr/local/../../.."?
> 
> What about it?  The case of /usr/local/../../.. is handled correctly,
> and the case where it's an underspecified relative path doesn't seem
> that interesting to me --- certainly that is not so important that we
> should get the wrong answer on cases that *are* plausible.
> 
> Most of the uses of canonicalize_path are on paths that are required to
> be absolute, anyway.
> 
> It wouldn't be too implausible to error out if pending_strips>0 after
> exiting the loop.

I figured it would be best to leave it alone if we can't process it, but
if you think it is more imporant to trim in cases like ../.., go ahead.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073