--On Monday, May 05, 2008 01:05:59 PM +0100 James Youngman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 12:19 AM, Jeffrey Altman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Are you willing to attempt to try to perform an AFS pioctl call
to verify if the path is in AFS?
Speculatively for every directo
On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 12:19 AM, Jeffrey Altman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > At the moment, find (oldfind in 4.2.x and 4.3.x) relies on examining
> > the results of stat(2) to figure out if it should turn off the leaf
> > optimisation. It makes this determination for every directory it
> > sear
James Youngman wrote:
So here you see that with /mnt/test/1 mounted, the link count of
/mnt/test is 3. However, this link count is at 3 because with
/mnt/test/1 UNmounted, there is still a directory /mnt/test/1 (i.e.
the mount point) and its ".." entry contributes 1 toward the link
count of /mn
On Thu, 20 Mar 2008, James Youngman wrote:
> This property is normally honoured by Unix (file-) systems because
> filesystems can only be mounted on subdirectories in any case. Here's
> an example:
Right, so the link count of the parent counts the mounted-on directory,
not what's mounted there.
On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 8:20 PM, Jeffrey Hutzelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > If you are in a mood to test things though, is oldfind's -noleaf
> > option needed to correctly search AFS filesystems? (without it, find
> > assumes that directories with a link count of 2 have no
> > subdirect
--On Saturday, March 15, 2008 08:36:45 PM + James Youngman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
First of all, please forgive me for posting to your mailing list
without first subscribing to it. Secondly, please CC me on your
replies since I am not subscribed :)
eh; that's what moderators are for
6 matches
Mail list logo
