On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 07:20:35PM -0800, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: > It's actually not hard to "fix", and nfsd would look a little less weird. But > what would this add, what do pathnames mean in the context of nfsd, and would > nfsd actually become less weird? It's not actually a pathname we care about, but a vfsmount + dentry combo. That one means as much in nfsd as elsewhere. We want nfsd to obey r/o or noatime mount flags if /export/foo is exported with them but /foo not. Even better would be to change nfsd so it creates it's own non-visible vfsmount for the filesystems it exports.. > But there is no way to tell different hardlinks to the same inode in the same > directory from each other (both the file and directory inode are the same), > and depending on the export options, we may or may not be able to distinguish > different hardlinks across directories. This doesn't matter. hardlinks are per definition on the same vfsmount. > If the nohide or crossmnt export options are used, we might run into similar > aliasing issues with mounts (I'm not sure about this). no, we won't. - 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
