I have a script which uses File::Temp and File::Copy to create a temporary copy of a file to read from. The file in question is periodically rewritten by a Java process, and it's imperative that I get a complete version.
My concern is the conflicting warning regarding correct usage of the two modules.
From File::Copy:
Note that passing in files as handles instead of names may lead to loss of information on some operating systems; it is recommended that you use file names whenever possible.
And from File::Temp:
For maximum security, endeavour always to avoid ever looking at, touching, or even imputing the existence of the filename. You do not know that that filename is connected to the same file as the handle you have, and attempts to check this can only trigger more race conditions. It's far more secure to use the filehandle alone and dispense with the filename altogether.
My question is; which of these warnings should take precedence? In this particular case, should I be using filehandles or names?
And more generally, how do you make judgement calls between conflicting usage warnings in situations like these?
-
Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
-
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
<code> <a> <b> <big>
<blockquote> <br /> <dd>
<dl> <dt> <em> <font>
<h1> <h2> <h3> <h4>
<h5> <h6> <hr /> <i>
<li> <nbsp> <ol> <p>
<small> <strike> <strong>
<sub> <sup> <table>
<td> <th> <tr> <tt>
<u> <ul>
-
Snippets of code should be wrapped in
<code> tags not
<pre> tags. In fact, <pre>
tags should generally be avoided. If they must
be used, extreme care should be
taken to ensure that their contents do not
have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent
horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor
intervention).
-
Want more info? How to link
or How to display code and escape characters
are good places to start.
|
