From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ron minnich <rminnich@lanl.gov>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] ls, rc question -- proposed change to rc/glob.c 
In-Reply-To: <393a7f63e7c4973e661988f1009f5d7a@vitanuova.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0403211446060.22122-100000@maxroach.lanl.gov>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 14:53:19 -0700
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 3c29fbc8-eacd-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

assume lsfilter takes a stream of plan 9 stat structs and turns them into
an 'ls'-like listing

bind -b /usr/rminnich/bin /bin

lsfilter</bin

ls /bin

should these yield the same results? If you don't care, then the libc.a 
approach is fine. If you do want the same results, I think you may be 
stuck doing the uniqueness tricks in the kernel a la BSD, which to me 
anyway is unattractive.

You end up picking your inconsistencies. Right now the inconsistencies are 
due to a very simple implementation which acts the same all the time (to 
me anyway). 

I'm not arguing either way, just wondering.

I also have to wonder about the perceived inconsistent behavior of union
directories and the hacks that people keep developing (BSD) or proposing
(this list) to deal with those inconsistencies. Could this imply that my
CS friend was right and we've got to find another way to get what unions
get us now? I.e. as much as we love them, does the very idea of unions
have a fundamental flaw that requires us to think up something newer and
cleverer? I can't imagine what that could be. Just wondering.

ron