Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!husc6!cmcl2!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-smoke.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: symbolic links are a botch
Message-ID: <5984@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Date: Sun, 14-Jun-87 00:00:11 EDT
Article-I.D.: brl-smok.5984
Posted: Sun Jun 14 00:00:11 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 14-Jun-87 19:38:41 EDT
References: <2629@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com> <5962@brl-smoke.ARPA> <2075@emory.UUCP>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 11
Keywords: file system, file name resolution

I should perhaps report that Dennis Ritchie implemented symlinks first,
but doesn't take sole credit for the idea, which came up in a group
discussion at Berkeley.  He also doesn't much like Korn's idea of "..",
on the grounds that it adds structural complexity.  My counter-argument
is that the strict directory hierarchy is such an important idea that it
should take precedence when there are conflicting possibilities; for
example, an RFS server will pass back evaluation of a pathname to the
client when a ".." path component crosses over a remote-mount point.
(So there is precedent for Korn's handling of "..".)

I hope I haven't misrepresented what Dennis told me last week.