Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern vfs_syscalls.c

[Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 12:31:32PM +0200, Simon 'corecode' Schubert wrote:
> On 15.08.2005, at 18:01, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> >That is exactly the behaviour the standard wants to avoid. The wording
> >of SUS is also pretty clear, "resolve to the same existing name" does
> >mean nothing less than having the same inode for a traditional Unix
> >filesystem. I also won't say this behaviour is counter-intuitive, it
> >makes as much sense as just dropping the old node.
> 
> The standard is clear to me: it doesn't talk about links, but symbolic 
> links.

No, it has been talking about symlinks explicitly before.

Matt, could we settle this down in the follow way:
(1) Revert to the old behaviour by explicitly checking for identical
vnodes and returning success [instead of deleting old].
(2) Ask for a rational and clarification on the SUS lists.
(3) Based on the outcome decide which behaviour we want.

Joerg