Re: Finding hardlinks

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



>On Thu, 2006-12-28 at 16:44 -0800, Bryan Henderson wrote:
>> >Statement 1:
>> >If two files have identical st_dev and st_ino, they MUST be hardlinks 
of
>> >each other/the same file.
>> >
>> >Statement 2:
>> >If two "files" are a hardlink of each other, they MUST be detectable
>> >(for example by having the same st_dev/st_ino)
>> >
>> >I personally consider statement 1 a mandatory requirement in terms of
>> >quality of implementation if not Posix compliance.
>> >
>> >Statement 2 for me is "nice but optional"
>> 
>> Statement 1 without Statement 2 provides one of those facilities where 
the 
>> computer tells you something is "maybe" or "almost certainly" true.
>
>No it's not a "almost certainly". It's a "these ARE".

There are various "these AREs" here, but the "almost certainly" I'm 
talking about is where Statement 1 is true and Statement 2 is false and 
the inode numbers you read through two links are different.  (For example, 
consider a filesystem in which the reported inode number is the internal 
inode number truncated to 32 bits).  The links are almost certainly to 
different files.

--
Bryan Henderson                     IBM Almaden Research Center
San Jose CA                         Filesystems

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]
  Powered by Linux