Subject: Re: bugs and/or misfeatures in namei changes
To: None <current-users@NetBSD.ORG>
From: der Mouse <mouse@Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA>
List: current-users
Date: 05/11/1997 18:32:56
> Being the `sinner' who originally changed the semantics of namei() to
> its current behavior, I'd like to point out that this is the Right
> Way, speaking in terms of POSIX; this also includes cp(1).
> In a nutshell: The current semantics of namei() conform to POSIX
>                (which has to be regarded as the right behaviour),

Why is the POSIX way necessarily Right?  If POSIX requires this bizarre
behavior of cp, as described by several people, then I think POSIX is
broken badly enough that conformance to this aspect of it is not worth
the damage it requires.

					der Mouse

		     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B