[lkml]   [1999]   [Aug]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Your backup is unsafe!

On Sun, 1 Aug 1999, Matthew Kirkwood wrote:

> On Sun, 1 Aug 1999, Khimenko Victor wrote:
> > > The reason I ask this is that my understanding of the way the VFAT fs
> > > works implies that the two names are effectively independant, and the
> > > only requirement attached to them is that they both point to the same
> > > file.
> >
> > Wrong. LFN is attached to short name.
> Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds very like an
> LFN is actually a (rather restricted) symlink.
> Perhaps that's a potential solution.

Damn. It looks like it's time to write a FAQ on the VFAT bogosities.
Please, look through the list archive for last 24 hours. Symlinks do not
move after the file, for one. And file doesn't become a symlink when you
rename it.

> It could make for rather ugly directory listings, but IMO
> that's better than the ugly code that we have now.

All handling of aliases you *can* eliminate this way sits in one (small)
function. And you'll have to reintroduce it in ->follow_link().

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:53    [W:0.073 / U:1.304 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site