Date: Sun, 14 Sep 1997 10:00:41 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: phk@critter.freebsd.dk (Poul-Henning Kamp) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com, fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: getcwd() as syscall... Message-ID: <199709141000.DAA14437@usr06.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <1328.874222680@critter.freebsd.dk> from "Poul-Henning Kamp" at Sep 14, 97 09:38:00 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Terry, read up on the code before you speak. > > It's always a good idea > > There is one point where you by accident is not entirely wrong, but > it is obvious from the rest that you don't know why that statement > is somewhat true. I will leave it to you to figure out which one. > > I will only address the two most wrong points here: > > >Other than that, it's a *great* idea, and the purpose behind > >the parent pointers in the first place. 8-) 8-). > > No it wasn't. [*] > > >Oh... is there an option to fsck to set these on a legacy FS? > > They are not stored on disk. Sorry. I thought that this had been done on my suggestion, per modification made to UFS for the NXFS code. If you will remember, I was the one who originally pointed out that POSIX did not require directories to be files, and therefore, it was OK to not allow hard links on directories. If you have a hard link on a directory, there's no reason *not* to store this data on disk. After all, there are ree fields which can be used for this purpose. If this is not currently the case, then it *should* be. Personally, I'd change the mechanism whereby hard links are stored\ on disk to ensure that files had parent pointers as well. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199709141000.DAA14437>