> > would you deconstruct bind/mount points as well? > > recursively? that way lies vms/windows. > > No, a bind's different... Maybe I'm being an idiot, but I'd like to > have a neat & tidy argument against symlinks, saying symlinks > introduce a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" kind of issue. > Maybe the fact that no-one seems to like to keep the pwd in the kernel > is argument enough.
wrt the question "what is the current directory", can you explan how is bind different? symlinks are problematic any way you slice it. consider the number of programs that would be in section 1 that have options, often in multiples, for dealing with symlinks. almost no unix programs (other than find) bother with mount points. - erik
