Directory rename semantics.

[Ivan Voras]

Ceri Davies wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 11:44:27AM +0100, Ivan Voras wrote:
>> 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.
> 
> That's essentially what has just happened, but without the knob.
> 
> I'm not really sure whether you agree with the change that was made or
> not.

I agree with the aspect of the change that unified the semantics on UFS
and ZFS. I hope somebody comes up with a knob that would toggle it for
both systems at the same time, if the alternate behaviour is useful to
people.

-------------- 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/20081107/541415a5/signature.pgp