Re: directory sort order no longer beginning with "." and ".."?

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>]

David Collier-Brown wrote:
> Alas, this implementation side-effect dates back to v6[1], and is so
> depended upon that even  CD filesystems, which are by no means Unix-like,
> contain dummy "." and ".." entries[2].

Er, no, I wouldn't call '.' and '..' implementation side-effects in 
themselves.  They're one of the particularly clever parts of the 
filesystem/namespace design.  I would agree that the specific 
implementation using "link" and "unlink" was a bit of a hack, and adding 
proper "mkdir" and "rmdir" made the world a better place.

>  I'd recommend either reproducing it or starting a project
> to hunt down and kill all the programs which assume it (;-))

Well, '.' and '..' are guaranteed to be somewhere in a (linked) 
directory, so all filesystems are required to make sure they exist 
somewhere, and programs which expect them to exist are perfectly within 
their rights.  But not necessarily the first two entries.

    J