[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: symbolic links & `..' entry
From: |
Pierre THIERRY |
Subject: |
Re: symbolic links & `..' entry |
Date: |
Mon, 12 Feb 2007 00:28:33 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) |
Scribit Ivan Shmakov dies 10/02/2007 hora 11:55:
> In traditional implementations, the symbolic link is, actaully, a
> special kind of a file, with which a ``string'' is associated.
Yes, but this is not seen by the user application. It's entirely an
abstraction in the FS. That's why there is a need for special operations
that break the abstraction, like lstat().
> > When in a/b, and I ask a link z to ../x, I'm lexically asking my
> > shell to create a link a/b/z to a/x. There is no need for the system
> > to keep track that it was ../x at the time of it's creation, AFAIK.
> Are you suggesting not the string is to be stored on FS? What else
> then?
I was arguing that when I'm in a/b and do 'ln -s ../x z', I don't care
that I'm really in a/c/d/e because in fact b is a symlink to c/d/e. So
as a user, I don't ask my system to create a link to the file "x in the
directory referenced by '..' in the current directory". As I see in my
prompt the cwd as a/b, I expect ../x to refer to a/x.
> > I'm not really convinced so far by the need of a physical .. entry.
> It's not the physical `..' entry I'm arguing the need for. I feel,
> that such a ``lexical'' interpretation of `..' would lead to a
> sufficiently different behaviour of the programs, and the consequences
> of that behaviour need to be investigated.
Yet I don't see any use of the physical '..' entry that makes sense.
Some of them just break any expection from the user, like creating a
symlink to anything in ../ when in a symlinked directory (you will in
nearly all cases create a dangling link).
Curiously,
Pierre
--
nowhere.man@levallois.eu.org
OpenPGP 0xD9D50D8A
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
- Re: Hurd and Unix/Linux and Plan9 features, (continued)
- Re: Hurd and Unix/Linux and Plan9 features, olafBuddenhagen, 2007/02/03
- Re: Hurd and Unix/Linux and Plan9 features, Ivan Shmakov, 2007/02/04
- Re: Hurd and Unix/Linux and Plan9 features, Shams, 2007/02/04
- Re: Hurd and Unix/Linux and Plan9 features, Pierre THIERRY, 2007/02/06
- Re: Hurd and Unix/Linux and Plan9 features, Ivan Shmakov, 2007/02/07
- Re: Hurd and Unix/Linux and Plan9 features, Pierre THIERRY, 2007/02/07
- symbolic links & `..' entry, Ivan Shmakov, 2007/02/08
- Re: symbolic links & `..' entry, Pierre THIERRY, 2007/02/08
- Re: symbolic links & `..' entry, Ivan Shmakov, 2007/02/10
- Re: symbolic links & `..' entry, Thomas Bushnell BSG, 2007/02/10
- Re: symbolic links & `..' entry,
Pierre THIERRY <=
Re: Hurd and Unix/Linux and Plan9 features, Pierre THIERRY, 2007/02/03
Re: Hurd and Unix/Linux and Plan9 features, olafBuddenhagen, 2007/02/03