On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 01:02:59PM +0200, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote: > What would a syntax look like which in your opinion does not remove > totally valid symlink targets for magic mushroom bullshit? Prefix with > // (which, according to POSIX, allows for implementation-defined > behaviour)? Something else, not allowed in a regular pathname? None. just don't do it. Use bindmount, they're cheap and have sane defined semtantics. -- Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
