Adam Megacz wrote: > Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> 2. In some alternate universe, would it have been possible to >>> implement mountpoints as symlinks to some volume-name space? For >>> example, if the cache manager automatically mapped >>> /afs/cell/@vol/volname to the root directory of volume "volname" >>> in cell "cell", mountpoints could be implemented as symlinks. > >> Mount points *are* symlinks. So I'm not quite sure what advantage this >> would have over the current state. > > True, but the cache manager grants them special semantics above and > beyond the normal semantics of symlinks. I'm curious about what > advantage that special treatment brings. > > Is there any particular use-case that called for the > "xyz/mountpoint/../ == xyz" property which normal symlinks do not > have? Are there any other properties mountpoints have which other > symlinks do not?
A mount point is implemented in Posix as a symlink. It is not a symlink. A mount point points to a directory that does not have a parent. That is a very significant difference. The behavior of the cache manager takes that into account when handling mount points. Jeffrey Altman
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
