On Sat, 13 Aug 2011, Guillem Jover wrote: > None of the other file types really need the deferred renames, and I > actually rather not have deferred renames at all! but oh well. Also > because we need to have the immediate rename code path in any case for > the directories I don't see the point in unneedingly deferring renames > for the other file types.
IMO this point of view hold when you implemented the initial change but now that we have real files/symlinks/hardlinks deffered, the other 3 (fifo/block/char dev) are like 0,01% of the affected files and this discrepancy just makes the code harder to understand. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer Follow my Debian News ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.com (English) ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.fr (Français) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
