Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!ncar!boulder!sunybcs!ugkamins
From: ugkamins@sunybcs.uucp (Dr. Chandra)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: What kind of things would you wnat in the GNU OS
Message-ID: <6275@cs.Buffalo.EDU>
Date: 4 Jun 89 17:28:30 GMT
References: <19829@adm.BRL.MIL>
Sender: nobody@cs.Buffalo.EDU
Reply-To: ugkamins@sunybcs.UUCP (Dr. Chandra)
Organization: SUNY/Buffalo Computer Science
Lines: 22

Rex_E._Robards.DlosLV@xerox.com wrote:
=>Three things that should not be in an efficient OS:
=>	1) virtual memory
=>	2) symbolic links
=>	3) long file names (BSD directories)

VM: nice, but certainly not efficient.  Point well taken.
symlinks: somewhat stupid in the first place, to me.  There are
  already normal links.  About the only advantage I can see is that
  when copying files, links duplicate files whereas symlinks can be
  "detected" and remade on the destination device/directory.  Not sure
  how they impact on EFFICIENCY though.
long names: depends what you consider efficient.  Trying to remember
  and mixing up cryptically shortened up and munged filenames cuts
  productivity and in that respect causes inefficiency.
---
We can only contemplate the facts as we are able to perceive them.
Do we get what we deserve, or deserve what we get?
"Answer my question, tell me no lies.
 Is this the real real world, or a fool's paradise?" 
  -- Eric Woolfson & Alan Parsons
(Lately, I'm beginning to believe the truth is the second case.)