On Mon, 2008-11-10 at 23:38 +0000, C H Forsyth wrote: > >And even we we stick with the "resources > >as regular files" approach on the client you're stuck with mostly POSIX > >environment + locking (+caching). POSIX means symlink(2) and mknod(2) > > no, because (unless i've misunderstood) they are accessing resources > (as regular files) on a remote server, and symbolic links and > outdated major/minor are irrelevant and not needed.
Agreed. That's why I didn't include this bit in the main set of requirements. But wouldn't you agree that files kept on a remote POSIX file system is an important and common class of remotes resources for which we don't quite have a consensus on how to use 9P? We have at least three different attempts at solving that: 9P2000.u, Skip's Text/Rext and a "parallel tree" approach, but no consensus(*) Thanks, Roman.
