Directory rename semantics.

[Ivan Voras]

Ceri Davies wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 06, 2008 at 08:28:29PM +0100, Edward Tomasz Napierala wrote:
>> After discussion about this with rwatson and pjd, I decided to do
>> the opposite: change ZFS behaviour to match UFS.  Reason is simple:
>> this is security, and we want to be conservative here.  It's impossible
>> to make sure this change wouldn't cause security problems.
> 
> Perhaps it would have been better to either do nothing or create a zfs
> property that toggled this behaviour so that people who expect ZFS to
> behave a certain way get it.  I'm not sure why we would want all
> filesystems to behave the same way, to be honest.

That would be desirable if we want file system semantics to be a
property of the OS instead of individual file systems. (Though I don't
know if there's ever been a conscious decision about this particular
goal). If so, a knob that toggles between the behaviours should toggle
it for all file systems. Having them behave differently can create
problems in migration to and from ZFS.



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 252 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch/attachments/20081107/2ddee5d0/signature.pgp