der Mouse wrote:
>>See symlink(7), which is wrong (it talks about a nonexistent mount
>>option), but at least it's a start.  magiclinks probably should be a
>>mount option rather than a global sysctl.
> 
> Shouldn't it actually be per-symlink?  Even with MNT_SYMPERM turned on,
> the sticky bit on a symlink means nothing (nor can I think what it
> reasonably *could* mean, unlike the set-id and write bits); perhaps
> that could be a suitable "handle magic-links for this link" bit.  (No,

Some months ago when I inquired about adding @booted_kernel,
the sense I got from the discussion was that the whole idea
of magic symlinks had some strong opposition (which probably
in part explained the change from per-mount to sysctl-global,
as a way of encouraging the feature to just fade away :) .

Did I get the wrong sense from that earlier discussion? Or is
there a good link to the archives that could be supplied to
represent the contra-magic-symlink position adequately?

-Chap