On Mon, 14 Aug 2000, James Sutherland wrote:
> > Sorry? I do rename("foo","bar"); Suddenly foo:splat becomes bar:splat.
> > Which of them should I drop?
>
> What has that got to do with short filenames?
Sigh... OK, I really need more coffee. Let me put it that way: this
behaviour (names migrating as the result of operation on different names)
has really nasty implications. On VFAT we had it due to short names. Your
proposal on NTFS promises the same sort of fun. Experience from dealing
with the shortname problems on VFAT makes me rather unhappy about your
proposal.
> There is a decision to be made: does renaming "foo" to "bar" rename
> "foo:splat" to "bar:splat". It would do under NT; OTOH, this isn't NT, and
> we cannot enforce this across all filesystems which may contain a
> "foo:splat". I'd go with "foo" != "foo:splat". Keep the two distinct.
They are _not_ distinct in the beginning. OK, NTFS is claimed to support
links. I bet that they apply to the whole bunch of forks/whatever, not to
the individual components. rename() will do...?
Are there separate permissions/ownership on these beasts? Welcome to fun
with rename() that happens to split them (and that will be any rename in
your variant).
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Aug 15 2000 - 21:00:31 EST