[lkml]   [2004]   [Aug]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: silent semantic changes with reiser4
    Nikita Danilov wrote:

    >Christophe Saout writes:
    > > Am Freitag, den 27.08.2004, 01:45 +0400 schrieb Nikita Danilov:
    > >
    > > > > At least in reiser4 they don't have, or at least you can't access them.
    > > >
    > > > They do.
    > > >
    > > > > ln -s foo bar; cd bar/metas shows me the content of foo/metas.
    > > >
    > > > That's because lookup for "bar" performs symlink resolution.
    > >
    > > So I can't access them and it is pointless. ;-)
    > >
    > > BTW, I can do a cd metas/metas/metas/metas/plugin/metas... I don't think
    > > this makes sense. :)
    >Why? foo/metas is a file system object just like foo. It has owner,
    >permission bits, so access to its meta-data should be provided, and
    >uniform way to provide access to the file system object meta-data is to
    >have these little magic files inside metas directory, which is a file
    >system object just like metas. It has owner^@^@^@^@*** - Lisp stack
    >overflow. RESET
    > >
    >To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    >the body of a message to
    >More majordomo info at
    >Please read the FAQ at
    I think Christophe is a bit right here. While in general having
    meta-meta objects makes sense, in this particular instance, I don't see
    the functional need for it. Can you supply an example of where it would
    be useful?
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:05    [W:0.021 / U:8.188 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site