[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:0.019 / U:5.596 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site