Messages in this thread |  | | From | (H. Peter Anvin) | Subject | Re: Extensions to HFS filesystem | Date | 30 Apr 1996 16:50:41 GMT |
| |
In article <199604300106.SAA04153@Kutta.Stanford.EDU>, Paul H. Hargrove <hargrove@sccm.stanford.edu> wrote: > >> If both of these are illegal under HFS, consider a special folder for >> files that don't have the proper number of references. For the case >> of multiple (hard) links, represent them using some reference into >> that directory. > I don't see that this is any better than the UMSDOS trick of >having hardlinks be symlinks to a hidden file. The potential problems >with a directory moving are reduced by keeping the files all in one >location, but I still don't like the idea of the hidden file. >
Actually, that is a pretty darn close emulation of the UNIX behaviour.
Consider the filename of the hidden file a "virtual inode number", and you will see why it works. It pretty much will solve all the semantic problems. It is still ugly, but I don't think there is a way around *that*.
-hpa
|  |