[6092] in Release_7.7_team
Re: Reworking liblocker
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jonathan Reed)
Wed Dec 3 13:48:44 2008
Cc: Evan Broder <broder@mit.edu>, release-team@mit.edu, athena10@mit.edu
Message-Id: <D2C621F5-E376-4CC5-99AB-04F7EB229552@mit.edu>
From: Jonathan Reed <jdreed@MIT.EDU>
To: Greg Price <price@mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20081203183815.GX10836@vinegar-pot.mit.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v919.2)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2008 13:47:59 -0500
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.00
On Dec 3, 2008, at 1:38 PM, Greg Price wrote:
> We do need some form of attach -e, for people maintaining replicated
> lockers. I don't think this needs to be any more complicated than
> making PyHesiodFS accept the symlink() call and accept unlink() on
> symlinks. That plan allows people to make fudges on the semantics (*)
> but only very consciously. It's also of minimal complexity.
>
As I recall, the argument against detach was "It affects other
users". Doesn't symlinking a RW copy in place of an RO copy also
affect other users?
Personally, I think Evan's approach of making /mit a per-user
directory is a much better one.
-Jon
