Date: Fri, 3 Jul 1998 12:29:35 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com> To: drosih@rpi.edu, mike@smith.net.au Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, jkh@time.cdrom.com, rivers@dignus.com Subject: Re: Variant Link implementation, continued Message-ID: <199807031629.MAA18898@lakes.dignus.com> In-Reply-To: <199807030416.VAA03798@antipodes.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>
> > I think there would be less headaches all-around if symlinks did not
> > key off environment variables, although I do think we'd want them to
> > key off of something as simple to adjust as environment variables are.
>
> This expresses my opinion quite succinctly. Overloading the
> environment space to also control variant links would be a Very Bad
> Idea, simply because the risk of name collision is too high.
>
> Allowing links to indicate that they *should* be keyed off the
> environment space, OTOH, isn't such a sin. eg:
>
> ${sysctl:hw.arch} and ${env:USER}
>
> but this creates a new union space with yet another different syntax.
>
> ${space=sysctl, mib=hw.arch} and ${space=env, var=USER}
>
> perhaps?
>
I like this idea (with perhaps a sysctl variable to name the
default space if none is provided...)
However, I'd like to ask the general syntax question... is there
a set of letters from which to choose which will not violate POSIX
semantics...
That is, can't I, right now, create a file named "${FOO}", or just
about anything?
So, how do we choose this symlink syntax without potentially breaking
something else?
- Just curious -
- Dave Rivers -
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199807031629.MAA18898>