Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 4 Aug 2003 18:58:19 -0400 | Subject | Re: FS: hardlinks on directories | From | Andrew Pimlott <> |
| |
On Mon, Aug 04, 2003 at 04:50:02PM +0200, Stephan von Krawczynski wrote: > There is a flaw in this argument. If I am told that mount --bind > does just about what I want to have as a feature then these > applictions must have the same problems already (if I mount > braindead). So an implementation in fs cannot do any _additional_ > damage to these applications, or not?
There is a flaw in this flaw. :-)
/tmp# mkdir a /tmp# mkdir a/b /tmp# mkdir a/c /tmp# mount --bind a a/b /tmp# ls a b c /tmp# ls a/b b c /tmp# ls a/b/b/ /tmp#
It is enlightening in this regard to consider the difference between using unix /etc/fstab and Hurd translators to manage your namespace.
In preparing this example, I discovered that find and ls -R already have hard-link cycle "protection" built in, so they are broken in the presence of bind mounts. :-(
Andrew - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |