contributed RFS

[Dave Truesdell]

> From: terryl%tekcrl.uucp at BRL.ARPA
> Date: 18 Jan 86 22:42:40 GMT
>
> >                                                       I take
> > issue with the claim that one does not want "find / -print"
> > to cross over to remote file systems as it traverses the
> > directory.  To the contrary, that is the whole point of RFS
> > transparency.
>
>      Ah, but probably not. Suppose two systems were linked by an RFS.
> Then, a "find / -print" would go into an infinite loop traversing both
> systems' file systems. Thus, you don't want find to cross over remote
> file systems. This (and similar) arguments are the same for symbolic
> links.

  Sun's NFS seems to handle this sanely.  Perhaps the solution is to keep the
semantics of the filesystem the same. (i.e. a tree, and not a cyclic graph.)
The system manager would have the responsability of keeping the remote mounts
from causing a loop. (A commercial system would have to make sure of this, by
enforcing some constraints.)

  Symbolic links are, as always, a special case.

  I agree with Doug Gwyn, the "remoteness" of the remote filesystems should
be transparent.