Re: File::Temp/File::Spec problems on Window s under taint mode – breaking change needed?

> Am 24.04.2015 um 05:37 schrieb Aristotle Pagaltzis <[email protected]>:
> 
> * David Golden <[email protected]> [2015-04-23 17:40]:
> [...]
>> Please see https://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=60340 for context.
>> 
>> I think File::Temp needs to be able to work around File::Spec::Win32
>> returning a non-writable directory.
>> 
>> My proposal was to warn and fall back to ".".  That's a small breaking
>> change, but I think doing something in a different place than
>> requested is better than failing entirely.
>> 
>> Alternatively, it needs to validate the Win32 response and throw an error
>> early, before attempting to make the directory so that the error message is
>> more informative.
>> 
>> Thoughts?
> 
> Windows considers the current directory an implied part of %PATH%,

True

> has no concept like the executable bit of Unixoid OSes,

Nope - it has such a concept, but it's in ACL's, not in attributes. History of
Windows was non-multi-user *shrug* - weird implementation, crummy supported ;)

> nor does it allow
> unlinking files while they’re open.

Depends on Filesystem ...

> So I’d feel uncomfortable about just
> unexpectedly dropping junk into the current directory, announced or not.
> Therefore I’d tend toward the latter.

Is there a reason not to tryout Win32 API function GetTempPath (https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa364992%28v=vs.85%29.aspx)?
I dunno how File::Spec/File::Temp on Unix behaves tmp points to a non-writable directory (think r/o file-system).

> But someone with better instincts for Windows may be able to call this
> bunk. Mostly I didn’t want to leave the question warnocked.

I agree - '.' is the worst choice one can make - and I intend to say 'start again with TMP="."' or so.

Cheers
-- 
Jens Rehsack
[email protected]