From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1765964AbXGPRX6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Jul 2007 13:23:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754102AbXGPRXu (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Jul 2007 13:23:50 -0400 Received: from [212.12.190.32] ([212.12.190.32]:32992 "EHLO raad.intranet" rhost-flags-FAIL-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751984AbXGPRXt convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Jul 2007 13:23:49 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 10848 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Mon, 16 Jul 2007 13:23:47 EDT From: Al Boldi To: =?utf-8?q?J=C3=B6rn=20Engel?= , Satyam Sharma Subject: Re: Hardlink Pitfalls (was: Patches for REALLY TINY 386 kernels) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 20:23:04 +0300 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <200707161722.53203.a1426z@gawab.com> <20070716165312.GA32647@lazybastard.org> In-Reply-To: <20070716165312.GA32647@lazybastard.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200707162023.04646.a1426z@gawab.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Jörn Engel wrote: > On Mon, 16 July 2007 22:14:41 +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote: > > On 7/16/07, Al Boldi wrote: > > >Satyam Sharma wrote: > > >> Or just "cp -al" to create multiple trees at (almost) no disk cost > > >> that won't interfere with each other in any way, and makes the > > >> development process / generating patchsets trifle easier as well ... > > > > > >That would be correct if hardlinks would actually do a CoW on modify, > > >instead > > >of misleading the user into thinking he is modifying an independent > > > file. > > > > "patch" already handles this correctly ... and > > backupcopy=auto,breakhardlink in vim (and something similar in other > > editors I presume) > > Yet even a single program failing to break the link will leave you with > a mess to sort out. No kidding! > The only place that can ensure to always break the > link is the kernel. Which is why I wrote the cowlink patches some years > back. Can you post a patch against 2.6.22? > The still need a lot of love to be merge-ready. But I do use them on a > daily basis. Well, if the patch is lean and optional and runtime configurable, then they should definitely be considered for inclusion. Thanks! -- Al