Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!yale!cmcl2!kramden.acf.nyu.edu!brnstnd
From: brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: hard linked symlinks (yeah)
Message-ID: <18872:Mar2519:03:1291@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Date: 25 Mar 91 19:03:12 GMT
References: <1991Mar24.000253.9515@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Organization: IR
Lines: 14

In article <1991Mar24.000253.9515@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> phil@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Phil Howard KA9WGN) writes:
> Does anyone see any technical problems with having a single inode for
> a symlink, linked to under several different names?

Sure: it changes the semantics of ln -s foo bar; ln bar blah; rm bar.

> The alternative was to have separate symlinks under each name, but that
> appeared to be consuming a data block for each one to store the name
> the symlink was pointing to.  I wanted to conserve some space.

Then you should be asking for symlinks stored in the directory file
rather than in separate fragments.

---Dan