Jan Harkes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On Fri, Dec 03, 1999 at 12:18:19PM -0500, Alexander Viro wrote:
> > On Fri, 3 Dec 1999, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> > 
> > > I don't like having only coda breaking the semantic. You'll end getting
> > > reports of "program X doesn't work with coda, why?". If you'll break the
> > > semantic in the VFS the program will be fixed ASAP and you'll never get
> > > the report in the middle of a stable kernel.
> > 
> > Or somebody will break your legs and patch will be reversed... Besides,
> > "foo doesn't work with CODA" has a simple answer: don't use foo on CODA.
> > Andrea, you _do_ realize that CODA is not a Linux-only thing? So it's
> > either different semantics on Linux and everything else _or_ doing that in
> > CODA anyway.
> 
> Actually, currently we return EXDEV on all cross directory hardlinks,
> and there have not been many programs that care. A program should expect
> this as it is always possible that the destination directory is located
> in another filesystem.

 Surely if it did stat calls, and the st_dev was the same, then it
could expect link to never return EXDEV.

-- 
James Antill -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I am always an optimist, but frankly there is no hope.
   -Hosni Mubarek

Reply via email to