Followup to: <AFFO3lui6S@khim.sch57.msk.ru>
By author: "Khimenko Victor" <khim@sch57.msk.ru>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> AC> It also breaks the flexibility of mounting we have now. Why is it
> AC> //ipc - what does //ipc have to do with ipc in other languages, why
> AC> can't I mount it where I want it ?
>
> POSIX IPC implementation needed finename, visible from userspace. If you
> have no knowleadge about where "IPC filesystem" is mounted you can not
> construct such name. With //ipc //ipc/bla-bla-bla will be ALWAYS
> //ipc/bla-bla-bla -- no matter what and when. The same goes for //proc and
> so on. Of course we can always say: if you are mounting procfs not in /proc
> and ipcfs not in /ipc then blame yourself. But then why it should be done
> from userspace if there are no choice ?
>
Because the // and /.. namespaces are huge, nasty, terrible kluges.
> Then we'll end up with kludges like devpts handling in glibc :-((
That's WRONG. If /ipc isn't mounted, you can't use this API.
Period. End of story.
-hpa
-- <hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."- 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 : Tue Mar 07 2000 - 21:00:09 EST