>> All this aliases-related stuff looks ugly.
>
> No kidding. In 2.0.x, the alias stuff was pretty easy. With the
> dentry code in 2.1.x, it got much uglier, and it took me from about
>> Gordon, do we *really* need to be able to open something by short
>> name? They introduce quite a lot of mess. BTW, example above
>> "worked" the same way before changes in 131.
>
> Yes, we really do need to be able to access by short names.
> Things like Wine depend on them.
Must they be fast though? You could immediately convert them to
long form. With all the names cached in long form only, it ought
to be a bit easier to avoid problems.
BTW, these short names are really common. (vfat, ntfs, smbfs, iso9660)
Perhaps they ought to be in struct stat. **duck** Well?
-
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/