Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 7 Jun 1998 14:30:10 +0200 (MET DST)
From:      Willem Jan  Withagen <wjw@surf.IAEhv.nl>
To:        mike@smith.net.au
Cc:        current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Variant Link implementation (Was: Re: lorder problem: ....... )
Message-ID:  <199806071230.OAA28150@surf.IAEhv.nl>
In-Reply-To: <199806061759.KAA01286@antipodes.cdrom.com>
References:  <199806061827.OAA16010@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In article <199806061759.KAA01286@antipodes.cdrom.com> you write:
>> <<On Sat, 6 Jun 1998 15:23:58 +0200 (MET DST), Willem Jan  Withagen <wjw@surf.IAEhv.nl> said:
>> 
>> > I do not want to debate the actual implemented syntax.  But comming from
>> > Apollo Domain OS this "feature" was one the the first things I missed when
>> > going to "real" Unix. So I would really find this an enhancement to FreeBSD.
>> 
>> If we really wanted to get variant symlinks, I would suggest copying
>> the already-fairly-well-known syntax of AFS, `@name_of_parameter'.  As
>> the metasyntactic variable suggests, these should be (a fairly small
>> number of) parameters which hold system-wide.  (Indeed, given the
>> existence of the sysctlbyname interface in the kernel, one could
>> simply kick them off in that direction.)
>
>Ok.  I did actually look at how this could be implemented last time it 
>came up, and I think it would be *reasonably* straightforward.

Can you come up with that scenario? I might be tempted to take a look at it
and possibly try to implement it. But I need to make some time estimates
if I ever will be able to finisch it.

>Can you clarify the AFS syntax a little more?  Is there a delimiter 
>around the 'name'?  If not, are variant components only allowed to be 
>entire path entities?  How do you put more than one entry based on a 
>single parameter into a given directory? Or are you forced to duplicate 
>information across more than one parameter?

Syntax is in some ways a cosmetic issue. What we need next to syntax is the
semantics of the variants. The easy way I once have thought of doing it,
is in libc. (or atleast still in userspace) This way semantics are fairly
easy and the sollution was doable. But I never got around to figuring out
where it would kill things. 

(Dumb question: Does INIT have an environment which we can load?)

Doing it thru sysctl-interogation has the advantage of the variables being
global to all processes. It has the disadvantage that it is no longer local
to one's process-space.

--WjW

 


-- 
Internet Access Eindhoven BV.,  voice: +31-40-2 393 393, data: +31-40-2 606 606
P.O. 928, 5600 AX Eindhoven, The Netherlands
Full Internet connectivity for only fl 12.95 a month.
Call now, and login as 'new'.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199806071230.OAA28150>