>On Fri, 2006-12-29 at 10:08 -0800, Bryan Henderson wrote: >> >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 > >> 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. >> > >but then statement 1 is false and violated. Whoops; wrong example. It doesn't matter, though, since clearly there exist correct examples: where Statement 1 is true and Statement 2 is false, and in that case when the inode numbers are different, 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
