On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:41:14AM -0500, Nico Williams wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 9:44 AM, Alan Coopersmith
> <alan.coopersm...@oracle.com> wrote:
> > On 06/26/12 05:46 AM, Lionel Cons wrote:
> >> On 25 June 2012 11:33, <casper....@oracle.com> wrote:
> >>> 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.
> >> This may be wrong way to go if it breaks existing applications which
> >> rely on this feature. It does break applications in our case.
> > Existing applications rely on the ability to corrupt UFS filesystems?
> > Sounds horrible.
> My guess is that the OP just wants unlink() of an empty directory to
> be the same as rmdir() of the same. Or perhaps they want unlink() of
> a non-empty directory to result in a recursive rm... But if they
> really want hardlinks to directories, then yeah, that's horrible.
This all sounds like a good use for LD_PRELOAD and a tiny library
that intercepts and modernizes system calls.
-Gary Mills- -refurb- -Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada-
zfs-discuss mailing list