Subject: Re: Symlink ownership (let's go back)
To: Captech) <email@example.com (James Graham>
From: John F. Woods <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 08/10/1995 07:59:41
> I think that, given that symlinks in directories which consist of ALL sym-
> links will at least double (likely more!) the size of a directory, and
> seeing that directories are kept relatively small on purpose (there are
> always exceptions, so don't bother telling me that!), putting symlinks in
> the directories themselves would be tantamount to having directory entries
> consist of full pathnames, which, of course, would be patently absurd.
Oh my. Consider the impact of this on a two-device /usr/spool/news. Some
directories will blow up to frightening lengths. Netnews is hardly a rare
> Anything is worth experimenting, but be sure to hit "worst case". These
> days, "average usage" is closer to "worst case" than to "median usage".
Or more importantly, if we render NetBSD useless for netnews, we will markedly
reduce its appeal. I would submit that there are much better things to spend
time experimenting with...