On Thu, Aug 02, Ph. Marek wrote: > On Mittwoch, 1. August 2007, Josef Sipek wrote: > > Alright not the greatest of examples, there is something to be said about > > symmetry, so...let me try again :) > ... > > Oops! There's a whiteout in /b that hides the directory in /c -- rename(2) > > shouldn't make directory subtrees disappear. > > > > There are two ways to solve this: > > > > 1) "cp -r" the entire subtree ... > > > > 2) Don't store whiteouts within branches ... > Sorry for making uninformed guesses, but if there are already special nodes > (whiteout), why not extending them to some more general format - specifying a > (source, destination) pair at the topmost level? > - A delete is a (source, NULL) pair > - A rename is a (source, destination) pair, which causes lookups on source to > use the string destination in the lower branches. Originally I had the idea that whiteouts are a special kind of symlink. After discussing that with various people sticked to the simplest approach. - 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
