> On Feb 2, 2018, at 1:18 PM, Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schinde...@gmx.de> > wrote: > > You cannot assume that the inode numbers are identical between file > systems/operating systems. That's simply not going to work.
Yes, I agree with you, I cannot assume this, so I checked. In my case, the inode numbers are indeed identical. > I know you really want *so hard* for the same working directory to be > accessible from both Windows and Linux. I have a lot of sympathy for that > sentiment. Though I do not see much chance for success on that front. I’m certainly willing to accept that there are going to be limitations by using a filesystem from two different operating systems. But regardless of the problems caused by that pattern, would you agree that the Windows code should be using the actual inode number (well, 32-bits of it) instead of zero? K.
