Messages in this thread |  | | From | (H. Peter Anvin) | Subject | Re: Extensions to HFS filesystem | Date | 30 Apr 1996 05:02:42 GMT |
| |
Followup to: <199604292012.QAA12599@krakatoa.ccs.neu.edu> By author: Albert Cahalan <albert@ccs.neu.edu> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > 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.
-hpa
-- PGP public key available - finger hpa@zytor.com "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.
|  |