Date: 22 Jul 2001 23:34:06 +0200 From: Assar Westerlund <assar@FreeBSD.ORG> To: tlambert2@mindspring.com Cc: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>, Joshua Goodall <joshua@roughtrade.net>, freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: flags on symlinks Message-ID: <5lhew4ir75.fsf@assaris.sics.se> In-Reply-To: Terry Lambert's message of "Sun, 22 Jul 2001 12:47:07 -0700" References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0107222210480.25554-100000@besplex.bde.org> <3B5B2DBB.16B607E2@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> writes: > Flags are associated with inodes, and symlinks do not have > inodes in the common case, as they exist solely in the > directory entry, unless they are too long. Hu? The contents of the link will be stored in the inode itself rather than in data blocks if it's short enough. > Pretty clearly, there should _NOT_ be a seperate system call; > the damn thing should just work. Adding a seperate system call > means theaching everything that deals with flags about it (ls, > chflags, Of course chflags has to know about it to call chflags or lchflags. But ls should just behave as usual with `-l': datan# ls -lo total 0 -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel nodump 0 Jul 22 23:31 bar lrwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel schg 3 Jul 22 23:31 foo -> bar datan# ls -loL total 0 -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel nodump 0 Jul 22 23:31 bar -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel nodump 0 Jul 22 23:31 foo > every FS supporing symlinks, etc.). Why? /assar 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?5lhew4ir75.fsf>