On Fri, 2006-12-29 at 10:08 -0800, Bryan Henderson wrote: > >On Thu, 2006-12-28 at 16:44 -0800, Bryan Henderson wrote: > >> >Statement 1: > >> >If two files have identical st_dev and st_ino, they MUST be hardlinks > of > >> >each other/the same file. > >> > > >> >Statement 2: > >> >If two "files" are a hardlink of each other, they MUST be detectable > >> >(for example by having the same st_dev/st_ino) > >> > > >> >I personally consider statement 1 a mandatory requirement in terms of > >> >quality of implementation if not Posix compliance. > >> > > >> >Statement 2 for me is "nice but optional" > >> > >> Statement 1 without Statement 2 provides one of those facilities where > the
> There are various "these AREs" here, but the "almost certainly" I'm > talking about is where Statement 1 is true and Statement 2 is false and > the inode numbers you read through two links are different. (For example, > consider a filesystem in which the reported inode number is the internal > inode number truncated to 32 bits). The links are almost certainly to > different files. > but then statement 1 is false and violated. -- if you want to mail me at work (you don't), use arjan (at) linux.intel.com Test the interaction between Linux and your BIOS via http://www.linuxfirmwarekit.org - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
