> Let me explain my philosophy towards pathconf. It's like those > configure scripts that check to see if you have a working version of > strcpy. If you don't, you are so utterly boned you'll find out soon > enough. If the nfs server isn't going to let you create a 255 > character name, you'll find out soon enough. pathconf is one of those > design by committee anti-portability features. It's silly it's even in > the kernel. It should be a libc stub that whispers sweet nothings in > your ear.
So, does that make the case for fixing this in VOP_PATHCONF instead? Call the underlying filesystem call if it's there? and if not return the "something sane" there? then we have our "something defaultly sane" shit in one place? Just thinking outloud...
