> Now, since the protocol does not restrict names (even if Plan 9 does it), > I'm wondering if setting the name to a full path starting from root could > be used to change atomically the directory of a file (given the write > permission on both original and target directory). > > Obviously I'm not referring to Plan 9 file servers (I guess this would be a > non retrocompatbile change), but I'm considering if such interpretation > would be wrong (according to the official specifications). > > A server supporting such behaviour could be considered a 9p2000 conformant > server?
it would not be conformant. the intro explicitly excludes slash as a valid character. (unlike a dns zone.) and its more detailed explinations are meant to hold for the entire section. but you could still do it, as long as the file servers were the same. - erik
