Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 16:58:47 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: roberto@keltia.freenix.fr (Ollivier Robert) Cc: terry@lambert.org, freebsd-install@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: "Installation" and "upgrade" Message-ID: <199509262358.QAA08714@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <199509262155.WAA25519@keltia.Freenix.FR> from "Ollivier Robert" at Sep 26, 95 10:55:04 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> It seems that Terry Lambert said: > > having inodes at all. There are semantic differences for links in > > directories with the sticky bit/SUID/SGID bits set that result from > > this. Specifically, you can create links for which you do not have > > priveledges to delete. > > I really think we should go back to the previous behaviour... I don't see > what CSRG gained by this. Can someone enlighten me ? Symlinks with zero cost in inodes. A good argument for symlinks in to the init.d scripts. 8-). Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199509262358.QAA08714>