From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: From: "Russ Cox" To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] permission bit of /mail/box In-Reply-To: <75e7381881d834cde7f12f6cbf3dca98@granite.cias.osakafu-u.ac.jp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 02:51:09 -0400 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 408bfe2e-eacc-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 > Both are not wrong. > User must know what s/he did on his/her home directory. If accessing /n/dump/2003/0921/usr/r/lib/profile fails because .../usr/r does not exist, then the error should say '/usr/r does not exist' instead of saying '/usr/r/lib/profile does not exist'. Both messages are true, but the first is more specific and thus more useful. The kernel used to produce the first message, but now produces the second. > Is it really difficult, once again? I meant to finish my last message with this point but I got sidetracked by the error message not being what I expected. I think the noarchive bit would be trivial to implement -- the necessary code already exists in order to avoid archiving /n/snap. I'm just not sure it's a good idea. Russ