[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <488F523C.7090201@goop.org>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 10:24:12 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: davecb@....com
CC: Ray Lee <ray-lk@...rabbit.org>, Oliver.Soltys@...l.renesas.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: directory sort order no longer beginning with "." and ".."?
David Collier-Brown wrote:
> Alas, this implementation side-effect dates back to v6[1], and is so
> depended upon that even CD filesystems, which are by no means Unix-like,
> contain dummy "." and ".." entries[2].
Er, no, I wouldn't call '.' and '..' implementation side-effects in
themselves. They're one of the particularly clever parts of the
filesystem/namespace design. I would agree that the specific
implementation using "link" and "unlink" was a bit of a hack, and adding
proper "mkdir" and "rmdir" made the world a better place.
> I'd recommend either reproducing it or starting a project
> to hunt down and kill all the programs which assume it (;-))
Well, '.' and '..' are guaranteed to be somewhere in a (linked)
directory, so all filesystems are required to make sure they exist
somewhere, and programs which expect them to exist are perfectly within
their rights. But not necessarily the first two entries.
J
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists