Anselm Martin Hoffmeister <an...@ho...> writes:
> Hello Eric,
>
> Tuesday, July 15, 2003, 2:00:35 PM, you wrote:
>
> > I would suggest that we error on an absolute symlink. I have
> > a very hard time seeing how an absolute symlink could be used properly
> > in this context. I guess in an nfs-root situation it might work.
>
> > But I keep having visions of absolute symlinks pointing to a different
> > location on the server than on exported nfs subtree.
>
> My knowledge about NFS is not so great (it just grew yesterday...),
> but AFAIK the absolute symlink to any file in the server tree will
> always be accessible (if it is exported at all) as
> nfs://server/<path>
> This is especially true if it points to a file in the same directory
> in which it lives.
The case I am making is that normally you don't export your root
file system from the server. Just like tftp where normally all that
is exported is /tftpboot. With nfs usually it is some subset of
the filesystem that is exported. Which is why I think handling absolute
paths in a way that gives a reasonable error message is much
preferable.
> However making absolute errors go ooops is no great deal, just enter a
> return -22; in the right line in the if-statement, around lines 340
> iirc. This is kind of policy, not necessarily technical decision.
Totally.
> Decide as you like, I'm fine without absolute symlinks anyway. Just in
> response to Ken's mail I though about them at all, previously there
> were only relative links implemented.
I am fine with absolute symlink if someone can make a reasonable case
for them. But until then I just want to say no.
Eric
|