Subject: Re: Symlink ownership (let's go back)
To: Steven J. Dovich <>
From: Tobias Weingartner <weingart@austin.BrandonU.CA>
List: current-users
Date: 08/08/1995 13:27:14
In message <>, "Steven J. Dovich" writes:
> > > Also, kludging up the directory structure makes no sense to me.  Why
> > > do you want to hack up something beautifull?  Why masacre (sp?) a
> > > thing of simplicity, flexibility and function?
> A plausible explanation is that during path resolution, if you have already
> gone to disk for the directory, why go to disk again for the content of
> an symbolic link. Symbolic links as directory entries can be considered
> a disk access optimization. Like all optimizations, the assumptions can
> be invalidated in a number of ways, but those usually get swept under
> the rug when justifying such a change..

Hmm, someone is gonna shoot me for this one.  Why do you want to make yet
another special directory entry?  There is no point.  Saving disk accesses
is what the cache is there for, let it do it's job.

| Tobias Weingartner | Email: weingart@BrandonU.Ca | Need a Unix sys-admin?  |
| Box 27, Beulah, MB |-----------------------------| Send E-Mail for resume, |
| R0M 0B0, Canada    | Unix Guru, Admin, Sys-Prgmr | and other details...    |
|      %SYSTEM-F-ANARCHISM, The operating system has been overthrown         |