> On Oct 30,  2:14am, Olaf Seibert wrote:
> } Subject: Re: Little prob with rm
> } For completeness, I would even argue for dir/file/.. being equivalent
> } to just dir, which is (in unix notation) what AmigaDOS does. Except that
> } under Unix a file has no ".." entry but under AmigaDOS the ParentDir()
> } of a file is defined and useful.
>
>      I totally disagree with this.  It is a major violation of the
> rule of least astonishment, as it is a major change to UNIX filesystem
> semantics.  Under UNIX file, do not have directories, which I feel
> is the way it should be.
>
> }-- End of excerpt from Olaf Seibert

I would have to agree with this.. I may be ignorant, but as I have
lwys understood unix filesystems, the directory is merely a special
form of file, not that the file is a special directory.. The fact that
direcories are special files has always been one of the things which
attracted me to unix, and trying to tke it further, making them
special forms of one another, I think you would lose some of the
modularity

..

oh well.. I dont claim to know anything, but I do wish to state an
opinion, which I feel may be useful :)

later

bart niswonger



				   
----		    -------------------------------			-------
finger me |  One day he found, topped with a smutty grin,   |	from:
for the	  |  The small corpse of a monkey, partly eaten.    |	 Anthony HHecht
rest.  	  |  Force of the sun had split the bluish skin,    |	
	  |  Which, by their questioning and entering in,   |	 Alceste in the
	  |  A swarm of bees had been concerned to sweeten. |	  Wilderness

		      My PGP public key opinion.