Re: link(2) allows directory hard links, man page says otherwise
Re: link(2) allows directory hard links, man page says otherwise
- Subject: Re: link(2) allows directory hard links, man page says otherwise
- From: "Mike Frysinger" <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 22:58:20 -0500
On Dec 12, 2007 7:41 PM, Rosyna <email@hidden> wrote:
> This is true. And directory hard links are a concept I do not like for
> various reasons. So, I was really pleased when people at WWDC and
> other places repeatedly said (or strongly implied) Time Machine used a
> private function to make directory hard links, that this SPI would not
> be exposed, and developers should not be making directory hard links.
>
> But alas, if some developer has code that depends on link() failing
> with EPERM for a directory (they don't check the path first), their
> code will magically start working on HFS+ on 10.5.
>
> My hope was that time machine would call some super private function
> (like hfs_super_private_link) that exposes hfs_vnop_link() to do its
> dirty deeds that no one else could, should, or can call.
>
> It's not my intention to ever intentionally create directory hard links.
i dont know what you're coding, but if you plan for it to be POSIX
compatible, your feelings on directory hard links are irrelevant as
POSIX specifically marks the capability as implementation defined. if
you're just writing an OS X application, then i guess you can take it
out on the apple guys. i dont mind ;).
-mike
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Darwin-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden