On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 09:15:31PM +1100, p...@maths.usyd.edu.au wrote:
> > Irrelevant. The statement was ...
>
> Sorry, you misunderstood, that was not the statement.
Here is the statement I replied to:
>> The link count of a files tells you the number of hard links that
>> are persisted within
On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 10:17:13AM +1100, p...@maths.usyd.edu.au wrote:
> But, mount requires root (and root can do anything, including shooting
> himself in the foot).
Irrelevant. The statement was that if /proc is not mounted, then the
link count tells if there are other ways to access the inod
On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 12:33:28AM +0100, Martin Rex wrote:
> > "mount --bind" behaves like a hard link and it does not increment the link
> > count.
>
> that seems to work similar to a hardlink on a directory (and also requires
> root privileges). It doesn't work for the same directory level, b
On Mon, Nov 02, 2009 at 08:53:26PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > The link count of a files tells you the number of hard links that
> > are persisted within the same filesystem. It is _NOT_ a promise
> > that there are no other means to access the inode of the file.
>
> It used to be promise bef
On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 10:03:54PM +0200, Felix von Leitner wrote:
> static inline int range_ptrinbuf(const void* buf,unsigned long len,const
> void* ptr) {
> register const char* c=(const char*)buf; /* no pointer arithmetic on
> void* */
> return (c && c+len>c && (const char*)ptr-c }
