[PATCH 3/3] remove open_symlink issue.

[guy fleury iteriteka]

* open_issues/open_symlink.mdwn: delete file.
---
 open_issues/open_symlink.mdwn | 30 ------------------------------
 1 file changed, 30 deletions(-)
 delete mode 100644 open_issues/open_symlink.mdwn

diff --git a/open_issues/open_symlink.mdwn b/open_issues/open_symlink.mdwn
deleted file mode 100644
index 663bfcb..0000000
--- a/open_issues/open_symlink.mdwn
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,30 +0,0 @@
-[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2012, 2013 Free Software Foundation, Inc."]]
-
-[[!meta license="""[[!toggle id="license" text="GFDL 1.2+"]][[!toggleable
-id="license" text="Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this
-document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or
-any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant
-Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts.  A copy of the license
-is included in the section entitled [[GNU Free Documentation
-License|/fdl]]."]]"""]]
-
-[[!tag open_issue_glibc]]
-
-
-# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-01-02
-
-    <pinotree> hm, is it a known issue that open("somesymlink", O_RDONLY |
-      O_NOFOLLOW) does not fail with ELOOP?
-    <youpi> pinotree: iirc there is code for it, maybe not the same behavior as
-      on linux
-
-
-## IRC, OFTC, #debian-hurd, 2013-05-08
-
-    <pinotree> the hurd issue is that O_NOFOLLOW seems broken on symlinks, and
-      thus open(symlink, O_NOFOLLOW) doesn't fail with ELOOP
-    <youpi> I don't really see why it should fail
-    <youpi> since NOFOLLOW says not to follow the symlink
-    <pinotree> yeah, but you cannot open a symlink
-    <youpi> ah right ok
-    <youpi> interesting :)
-- 
2.20.1