> On Jan 30, 2015, at 10:59 , Giacomo Tesio <giac...@tesio.it> wrote: > > It surely would not be conformant to Plan 9 systems, but to the protocol?
No. Joel has it right. Writing a server which allows / in names would mean that the "/" you're slipping into a name wouldn't always be a directory indicator or name separator. Think of it as the protocol accommodating systems which use some other marker. The relevant point is that the "name" in question (which, as you noticed, the protocol allows to contain / even though plan9 doesn't) is the name *within a directory*, not a full path name. walk(5) probably gives the best explanation of this, or perhaps the discussion of create in open(5).
