Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 1 Aug 1999 01:15:02 -0400 (EDT) | From | Alexander Viro <> | Subject | Re: Your backup is unsafe! |
| |
On Sat, 31 Jul 1999, Khimenko Victor wrote:
> In <Pine.LNX.4.10.9907311347330.21307-100000@ps.cus.umist.ac.uk> Riley Williams (rhw@MemAlpha.CX) wrote: > > What I'd like to see is this dealt with in a SENSIBLE way, so both > > operating systems see both versions of the name. That way, all such > > problems vanish. > > > One obvious way round this would be to have the file always appear > > under the MSDOS version of the name, with the LFN version appearing as > > a hard link to it. Throw that in, and the problem mentioned above goes > > away since tar then sees and records both versions of the name. > > > This would place two limitations on the hard link facility: > > > 1. Only one hard link to any given file. Therefore, the link > > count field in long directory listings is limited to show > > either 1 link (for a file without an LFN) or 2 links (for > > a file with an LFN). > > > 2. The hard link must be in the same directory as the file it > > points to. > > > I don't see either of those limitations as being any more restrictive > > than what's already in use.
3. We are getting hardlinks to directories. Bummer.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |