Bart Veer wrote: >>>>>> "Ross" == Ross Younger <w...@ecoscentric.com> writes: > > Ross> The Unix world traditionally shuns such things as an > Ross> abomination. The eCos docs are quiet on the subject, as is > Ross> the code in ramfs and jffs2. Should they work? Does anybody > Ross> use them? > > Ross> (By the way: I started this discussion with a bugzilla > Ross> ticket, which as Andrew points out is probably the wrong > Ross> place. > Ross> http://bugzilla.ecoscentric.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1000775 ) > >>From http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/7990989775/xsh/link.html: > > "The link() function creates a new link (directory entry) for the > existing file, path1. > > The path1 argument points to a pathname naming an existing file. The > path2 argument points to a pathname naming the new directory entry > to be created. The link() function will atomically create a new link > for the existing file and the link count of the file is incremented > by one. > > If path1 names a directory, link() will fail unless the process has > appropriate privileges and the implementation supports using link() > on directories." > > So creating links to directories is not completely disallowed, but > from my reading it is certainly discouraged. I would be happy with > changes to ramfs and jffs2 to prevent new links to directories. > jffs2 should probably continue to support such links in an existing > filesystem, in case they are created in another OS.
What about "./." and "./.."? Those must certainly be allowed. -- ------------------------------------------------------------ Gary Thomas | Consulting for the MLB Associates | Embedded world ------------------------------------------------------------
