On 1/23/06, Dan Cross <cross@math.psu.edu> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 01:33:35PM -0700, Ronald G Minnich wrote:
> > The big complaints I know of so far on 9P are
> >
> > - there is no posix file locking (sorry, but people want it) although
> > the 'only allow one open at a time' is a pretty damned good substitute
> >
> > - no ACLs (I'm convinced that the stat and wstat could be trivially
> >       extended to support this --- 9p2000.acl)
> >
> > - doesn't fit linux vfs semantics too well (just a joke, son, but true
> >    too -- sometimes you have to fit a good thing onto a broken thing)
> >
> > That's about all I've hit so far. I spent about 5 years hacking on nfs,
> > and I have to say 9p is a way better protocol.
>
> I'm sure some crackhead somewhere has added ``doesn't do readlink or
> symlink'' to that list.



They might if they're on a unix system with no private namespaces.