[lkml]   [1996]   [Apr]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Extensions to HFS filesystem
Followup to:  <>
By author: Albert Cahalan <>
In newsgroup:
> I hate the way umsdos does this. Each device file, link, fifo,
> and socket, uses a disk cluster. That's often 16 kB per device file,
> and /dev has quite a few.

Sorry, but you're just plain wrong. Link yes (but so do most UNIX
filesystems), but not for device files, fifos or sockets.

> > The question of how to handle hard links remains open. I
> > don't like what UMSDOS does, but can't think of a good alternative.
> If you can't do it right, DON'T DO IT, PLEASE!!!
> The umsdos filesystem is severely broken. There are very few times
> that a symbolic link is not equivalent to a hard link. You don't
> even need hard links on the root partition. You could have the system
> call return an error or make a symbolic link (a mount option?), but
> please don't try to pretend that hard links exist when they don't.

Sorry, but POSIX require them. Just don't use them if you don't like'm.


PGP public key available - finger
"The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens." -- Bahá'u'lláh
I don't work for Yggdrasil, but they sponsor the linux.* hierarchy.

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:37    [W:0.071 / U:2.264 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site