On Monday 04 August 2003 10:56, Stephan von Krawczynski wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Aug 2003 08:42:09 -0700 (PDT)
>
> Brian Pawlowski <beepy@netapp.com> wrote:
> > I'm still waking up, but '..' obviously breaks the "no cycle"
> > observations.
>
> Hear, hear ...
>
> > It's just that '..' is well known name by utilities as opposed
> > to arbitrary links.
>
> Well, that leads only to the point that ".." implementation is just lousy
> and it should have been done right in the first place. If there is a need
> for a loop or a hardlink (like "..") all you have to have is a standard way
> to find out, be it flags or the like, whatever. But taking the filename or
> anything not applicable to other cases as matching factor was obviously
> short-sighted.
Has nothing to do with the loop. It is called an AVL tree.
It makes the namei lookup function extreemly simple to implement:
"../file" is treated in the same way as "./file" is treated, which
is the same as "file". No special case required. It allows the VERY
flexable (and simple) relative path name handling.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 07 2003 - 22:00:25 EST