>Does someone know the history which led to the EPERM for unlink() of
>directories on ZFS? Why was this done this way, and not something like
>allowing the unlink and execute it on the next scrub or remount?

It's not about the unlink(), it's about the link() and unlink().
But not allowing link & unlink, you force the filesystem to contain only 
trees and not graphs.

It also allows you to create directories were ".." points to a directory 
were the inode cannot be found, simply because it was just removed.

The support for link() on directories in ufs has always given issues
and would create problems fsck couldn't fix.

To be honest, I think we should also remove this from all other
filesystems and I think ZFS was created this way because all modern
filesystems do it that way.


zfs-discuss mailing list

Reply via email to