From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 12 05:09:35 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 70C2E3D1 for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 05:09:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qa0-x22e.google.com (mail-qa0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c00::22e]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A7D4154A for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 05:09:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qa0-f46.google.com with SMTP id ii20so13204801qab.33 for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 21:09:34 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dataix.net; s=rsa; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=zkYKm2Py3TiZA8+ZdtQmko19Zizw7ZYQHqzQxu/xH3U=; b=TU+0N7RL+nLY59sJiSKY5FGLZgm+oqjV5HfVg1xyyR4H7NZxmNHabZzJ7FxIGoisCO niV6tQHtre8EUtlYac5cVzy2eurJVKKxJLUwIFzgTgoI+4Vf1uUAdxrkfz3swdI3dPcn J00uUdXw+x7hwCKNRjn93uNyftlr6pzHHQ78I= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=zkYKm2Py3TiZA8+ZdtQmko19Zizw7ZYQHqzQxu/xH3U=; b=bG9Cyek1I4sHG1nOd0KOCq5Cn5fe1mjjTlBFpp/K3iJNMTTwM20UjY5GDQYLFzkQPS a4iYBTmuud8Mn2UGVP+7x4ayBi3C1L1qvuRA5A15WBapRZCJVTrYcJU1F1lqNPfAURy+ MroyaYmOwIgBtrBWb21KHBGSUE75aAq9GWYA3L/RymnqGpyRavcy+Ssq+GHmTXR/PUCh SXQwMnJbQ4hN0dDA9EsTOufZXZ/VPQM9iLE7H3Ybm2juWTNxCGMlgWi5NbIPVfoY42Cf Jf3TACYvHyDV/Qwve1LRRXxdoIa/+jnUcwGIE2BQwR5Bz9s0Q7CSGIScv7/IYnKCuwVS sLHw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkNZluohgW6wJfFfRgXKIdVd9MxNJ6Nb0Gu2Ygjus4uPoRP5B8q2HUVLJCo7LRZ7x4h19ZH MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.229.56.200 with SMTP id z8mr59353610qcg.1.1392181774284; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 21:09:34 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.140.97.75 with HTTP; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 21:09:34 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [75.128.101.59] Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 00:09:34 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Thoughts on Multi-Symlink Concept From: Jason Hellenthal To: freebsd-filesystems@freebsd.org, "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.17 X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 05:09:35 -0000 Hi All, Now I already know the thoughts on symlink hell within filesystems all to well considering most Linux flavoring's. But I am curious as to what all your opinions would be to add symlink support to multiple target files much like what you could do with cat(1) or portalfs to include a bunch of files in one instance but similar to the following examples in place of such. Instead of: cat /path/to/files* ln -sm /path/to/files* ./my_concat_list cat ./my_concat_list Or ln -sm /path/to/file1 /path/to/file2 ./my_concat_filters pfctl -v -f ./my_concat_filters Personally while I know it's a hack, but I feel it would bring some glue to programs and other such situations that do not have file include support and add support per-say way to create a repeatable playlist to shorten user operations at any given time. Obviously this isn't anywhere else implemented and would need to be a BSD extension of ln(1) but I find that it could be a beneficial feature for those that could use it to its full potential. I've thought about the same instance also being done with hardlinks but I keep coming across the idea that there are too many race conditions that would be found with that. Anyway . . . opinions, thoughts, ideas, criticism . . . welcome. Thanks for your time.