[erlang-questions] UNC filename handling

[John Högberg]

Hi Steve,
Thanks for reporting this, I can confirm that it's a bug in our UNC
path handling. I've included a fix in our nightly builds, and it'll be
released in OTP 22-rc2 if all goes well.
Regards,John Högberg
On Thu, 2019-03-21 at 15:36 +0000, Steve Strong wrote:
> Hi,
> Seeing a strange thing on Windows systems:
> 
> (foo@REDACTED)55> file:list_dir("z:/Signal-53-mp4/frame_store").    
>         
> {ok,["100","2124","2142","2161"]}
> 
> 
> (foo@REDACTED)56> file:list_dir("//HB-SVR/Video/Signal-53-
> mp4/frame_store"). 
> {ok,["frame_store"]}
> 
> 
> Z: is mapped to //HB-SVR/Video, so I would have expected these two
> commands to produce the same result, but the one going through the
> UNC form is giving the wrong answer (the contents of the frame_store
> folder are “100”, “2121”, “2142" and “2161” as the call through the
> mapped drive correctly returned).  This issue, in turn, causes other
> commands such as filelib:wildcard to return the incorrect results
> when handed UNC paths.
> 
> This is running Erlang 21.2 / erts 10.2
> 
> Is this a known issue, or am I misunderstanding how the UNC paths
> should behave?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Steve
> _______________________________________________erlang-questions
> mailing listerlang-questions@REDACTED
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20190321/3c3436d8/attachment.htm>