----- Original Message ----- From: "Ceri Davies" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Andrew Cutler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 3:15 PM Subject: Re: chown broken??
> On Fri, Dec 20, 2002 at 03:12:17PM +0100, Mark wrote: > > > I must say, though, that while I understand this behaviour, one can > > argue on what exactly "recursive" is to mean here. Intuitively, > > the definition of "the current sub-directory and all sub-directories > > below the current directory (and that for each subdirectory)" seems > > the correct one. Which would exclude "..", as this is not a sub-directory > > of the current directory, but the parent. > > Not really. It recurses through the directories named on the command > line, of which '..' happens to be one. Yes, "the directories named on the command line" within the CURRENT directory. Technically, "." and ".." are entries within the current directory (try: "od -c ."), and they have inode numbers too. But that does not deter me from deeming it a bit counter-intuitive to consider ".." a directory of the current directory. :) Especially in the context of recursion. - Mark To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
