In article <20110801094633.ga17...@homeworld.netbsd.org>, Emmanuel Dreyfus <m...@netbsd.org> wrote: >-=-=-=-=-=- > >On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 06:36:53PM +0000, Christos Zoulas wrote: >> I don't have an issue with it as long as: >> - fsck does not get confused >> - filesystems don't need to be modified to support it >> - there is consensus that this is not harmful >> - I am also ambivalent about exposing this in the native abi >> because it will only cause confusion. > >Attached is the patch that adds llink(2) and its documentation. The test I >ran are below (the llink program just calls llink(2)). > >fsck has no probmem with it, ffs was not modified. For it >being harmful, I cannot immagine what could be done with it, but >we could restrict it to root just in case. > >On confusion, well, I think the llink name speaks by itself.
Except for the ktruser() call, looks good to me (my personal opinion). christos