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>