Subject: Re: lchflags(2)?
To: None <>
From: Christos Zoulas <>
List: tech-kern
Date: 04/17/2000 04:04:47
In article <>,
matthew green <> wrote:
> i've implemented an lchflags(2) (that does not follow symlinks, and
> can thus operate on symlinks).  it appears to work just fine.  however
> the chflags(1) man page claims that symlinks don't have flags?
> chflags(1) itself will need some updating, but does anyone object to
> this new system call?

Add it; the comment refers to the 4.4BSD temporary attempt to hide the
fact that symlinks are stored in inodes.