Subject: Re: lchflags(2)?
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Christos Zoulas <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 04/17/2000 04:04:47
In article <email@example.com>,
matthew green <firstname.lastname@example.org> 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.