On Sat, 10 Aug 2013 17:54:56 +0200 Irek Szczesniak wrote: > On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 5:44 PM, Glenn Fowler <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Sat, 10 Aug 2013 17:38:19 +0200 Irek Szczesniak wrote: > >> On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Glenn Fowler <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > On Sat, 10 Aug 2013 17:19:29 +0200 Irek Szczesniak wrote: > >> >> On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Glenn Fowler <[email protected]> > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> > it still has not been explained why special fs treatment like this > >> >> > goes into ksh and not src/lib/libast/something > >> >> > is this really something *only* ksh will trip over > >> > > >> >> IMO yes, because entering a NFSv4 xattr directory is unique for a > >> >> shell. Otherwise the only way to do it is to run /usr/bin/runat <obj> > >> >> <prog> which is cumbersome at best and useless if you have builtins. > >> > > >> > how is the chdir()/fchdir() done by cd(1) different from the > >> > chdir()/fchdir() > >> > done by find(1) or tw(1) or any of the -R commands? > > > >> You can cd -@ into all filesystem objects and not only directories. > >> Links included. And they all have their own resource forks/XATTR. > > > > ok, but why should/shouldn't the other commands mentioned above be able to > > the same?
> Because it's a rare and rarely used ability and feature to deal with > resource forks/XATTR files? I do understand why Roland did it and > Cedric and my people own like it. We're both Apple shops in our labs > and the admins need a way to access file files in emergencies. But I'm > not convinced that putting resource fork/XATTR support into every > utility is a good idea. but isn't "putting resource fork/XATTR support into every utility" exactly what cd -@ does? after all, 'cd -@ barf; ls' will affect ls -- will ls need to know its inside a fork? I'm balking at this because I know (but can't enumerate) that -@ infects more than cd(1) and the patches for cd -@ are fragile (not the patcher's fault, its weirdnix) when chunks of code like this are so fragile, at least I want to understand what's going on including and especially the scope suppose we finally get cd -@ working to everone's satisfaction what is the inevitable "add -@ to foo" patch going to look like? the same fragility, the *same* code? _______________________________________________ ast-developers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.research.att.com/mailman/listinfo/ast-developers
