[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Hurd and Unix/Linux and Plan9 features
From: |
Alfred M. Szmidt |
Subject: |
Re: Hurd and Unix/Linux and Plan9 features |
Date: |
Tue, 6 Feb 2007 17:00:53 +0100 (CET) |
> Use /hurd/firmlink to get hardlinked directories.
Firmlinks aren't the same as hardlinks, neither technically nor
semantically.
If you have a firmlinked file or directory, then there is still a
primary (hard) link and a secondary (firm) link. Removing the
primary link will destroy the directory, breaking the firm
link. With hard links, that doesn't happen.
I stand corrected.
I think it would be useful to have a link type in the Hurd that can
fully emulate hard links in the above example (by transparently
switching the firmlink to a hard link if the primary link goes
away), but firmlink doesn't do that -- and sadly, I see some
fundamental problems, with probably make such a behaviour
unfeasible :-(
I see such problems as well. Do hard links even work on GNU? One
could, I suppose, use a similar hack to how symlinks are handled, I
think.
- Re: Hurd and Unix/Linux and Plan9 features, (continued)
- 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, 2007/02/11
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