Re: Finding hardlinks

[Miklos Szeredi]

> > There's really no point trying to push for such an inferior interface
> > when the problems which samefile is trying to address are purely
> > theoretical.
> 
> Oh yes, there is. st_ino is powerful, *but impossible to implement*
> on many filesystems.

You mean POSIX compliance is impossible?  So what?  It is possible to
implement an approximation that is _at least_ as good as samefile().
One really dumb way is to set st_ino to the 'struct inode' pointer for
example.  That will sure as hell fit into 64bits and will give a
unique (alas not stable) identifier for each file.  Opening two files,
doing fstat() on them and comparing st_ino will give exactly the same
guarantees as samefile().

> > Currently linux is living with 32bit st_ino because of legacy apps,
> > and people are not constantly agonizing about it.  Fixing the
> > EOVERFLOW problem will enable filesystems to slowly move towards 64bit
> > st_ino, which should be more than enough.
> 
> 50% probability of false positive on 4G files seems like very ugly
> design problem to me.

4 billion files, each with more than one link is pretty far fetched.
And anyway, filesystems can take steps to prevent collisions, as they
do currently for 32bit st_ino, without serious difficulties
apparently.

Miklos
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/