REVOKE(2) BSD Programmer's Manual REVOKE(2)
revoke - revoke file access
#include <unistd.h> int revoke(const char *path);
The revoke function invalidates all current open file descriptors in the system for the file named by path. Subsequent operations on any such descriptors fail, with the exceptions that a read() from a character dev- ice file which has been revoked returns a count of zero (end of file), and a close() call will succeed. If the file is a special file for a dev- ice which is open, the device close function is called as if all open references to the file had been closed. Access to a file may be revoked only by its owner or the superuser. The revoke function is normally used to prepare a terminal device for a new login session, preventing any access by a previous user of the terminal.
A 0 value indicated that the call succeeded. A -1 return value indicates an error occurred and errno is set to indicated the reason.
Access to the named file is revoked unless one of the following: [ENOTDIR] A component of the path prefix is not a directory. [ENAMETOOLONG] A component of a pathname exceeded 255 characters, or an entire path name exceeded 1024 characters. [ENOENT] The named file or a component of the path name does not ex- ist. [EACCES] Search permission is denied for a component of the path prefix. [ELOOP] Too many symbolic links were encountered in translating the pathname. [EFAULT] path points outside the process's allocated address space. [EPERM] The caller is neither the owner of the file nor the su- peruser.
The revoke function was introduced in 4.3BSD-Reno. MirOS BSD #10-current June 4, 1993 1
Generated on 2016-04-09 18:24:16 by $MirOS: src/scripts/roff2htm,v 1.83 2016/03/26 23:38:28 tg Exp $
These manual pages and other documentation are copyrighted by their respective writers;
their source is available at our CVSweb,
AnonCVS, and other mirrors. The rest is Copyright © 2002–2016 The MirOS Project, Germany.
This product includes material provided by mirabilos.
This manual page’s HTML representation is supposed to be valid XHTML/1.1; if not, please send a bug report – diffs preferred.