Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> writes:
> > In other words, in that case POSIX draft is broken and we would be
> > better off fixing that bug instead of casting it in stone. Behaviour in
> > question is inconsistent with every other case when links are
> > created/removed/renamed.
>
> You might want to take that up with the relevant posix committee then
Symlinks are not in the current POSIX standard and therefore the
existing POSIX standard is OK. Symlinks are coming in the next
revision of the standard as an option (due to the merging with the
Unix specs). If you find something inadequate in the Austin group
draft tell me what it is and a solution for it. I'll make sure it
gets handled in the next meeting.
-- ---------------. drepper at gnu.org ,-. 1325 Chesapeake Terrace Ulrich Drepper \ ,-------------------' \ Sunnyvale, CA 94089 USA Red Hat `--' drepper at redhat.com `------------------------- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jun 15 2000 - 21:00:23 EST