> What is wrong with having symlinks owned by their creators?

Because that would require symlinks to have real owners.  The whole
idea behind this change was that it be preparatory to symlinks becoming
non-inode objects (eg, a funny type of directory entry) without real
owners.  But of course _something_ has to be returned in the owner
fields upon a VOP_GETATTR; the discussion has been over what the right
thing to put there is.

> If symlinks were owned by their creators, then this problem goes
> away.

True.  But it would also require symlinks to have somewhere to remember
who created them.

> It's also appealing from a sysadmin's point of view: if I see a
> strange symlink in /tmp, I want to know who did it.

Good point.

					der Mouse

			    mouse@collatz.mcrcim.mcgill.edu