From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Subject: Re: [9fans] FS question
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v552)
From: Rob Pike <rob@mightycheese.com>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <opryfc8nqcrveh1e@smtp.borf.com>
Message-Id: <8D1F6AC3-139C-11D8-A204-000A95B984D8@mightycheese.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 08:40:11 -0800
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 85180ae2-eacc-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

> I was just curious to the reasoning behind dropping links.
> Did, for example, Ken's FS not do links because Plan 9 had
> bind or did Plan 9 use bind because, possibly among other reasons,
> FS didn't do any links.  Or was it just an accident of
> design, a side affect of putting the file name in the meta data?

links are bizarre, as rsc said.

i don't really know the answer to your question; i think rsc may
have actually done so.  when redesigning, you tend to throw
away the stuff you don't want.

also, think how links would work in plan 9. it's bad enough on
unix, where you can't link from one file system to another, even
on the same disk. with plan 9's malleable name spaces and files
appearing from all over, links would work even more unpredictably.

-rob