From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 18:28:39 +0200 From: tlaronde@polynum.com To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Message-ID: <20120816162839.GB1029@polynum.com> References: <20120805173639.GA395@polynum.com> <20120815173327.GA424@polynum.com> <20120815200949.4628BB85B@mail.bitblocks.com> <20120815212734.GA1190@polynum.com> <20120816034747.7FE5EB85B@mail.bitblocks.com> <20120816053428.GA427@polynum.com> <20120816154130.GA551@polynum.com> <384b49bb1ec181eab48f9b9920a12662@coraid.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <384b49bb1ec181eab48f9b9920a12662@coraid.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Subject: Re: [9fans] Multi-dimensional filesystem Topicbox-Message-UUID: aa2e740a-ead7-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:06:40PM -0400, erik quanstrom wrote: > > > > > Except by allowing a new syntax .../{a,b,c,d}/foo meaning that foo has > > a, b, c and d as parents, the only way I see things working with the > > utilities and the ".." treatment is to insert a special name ensuring > > that a ".." suppression leading to this name will trigger the correct > > answer from the fileserver. > > this is already the case due to union directories (as bakul points out), > and the solution has been widely discussed. I gather. But here, there is an union on request (descending), and a split once you go up, since it is not the purpose to hide the "explication" of the union... -- Thierry Laronde http://www.kergis.com/ Key fingerprint = 0FF7 E906 FBAF FE95 FD89 250D 52B1 AE95 6006 F40C