You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I'm wondering if the following could be done. If I understand correctly sshfs/fuse seems to assign its own inode numbers to files and hard links are not assigned the SAME inode number and the link count is not incremented. Would it be possible to do just that? If it sees the same inode number from the orig filesystem for different filenames it assigns the existing inode number (not a new one) and increments the link count for both.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Thanks for the report! Yes, this would be possible, but it entails switching from the high-level to the low-level FUSE API.
If you want to work on it, I'll be happy to review patches. You can send pull requests either here or via GitHub. If you have questions about the implementation, please use the mailing list.
That said, if no one steps up to work on this I am going to close this issue in a few days. This isn't meant to be a rejection of your idea, it's just that there is little point in keeping enhancement/wishlist requests in the bug tracker that no-one intends to work on (prefer to use the issue tracker as a tool to manage ongoing work rather than a database of possible enhancements and/or known issues)
I'm wondering if the following could be done. If I understand correctly sshfs/fuse seems to assign its own inode numbers to files and hard links are not assigned the SAME inode number and the link count is not incremented. Would it be possible to do just that? If it sees the same inode number from the orig filesystem for different filenames it assigns the existing inode number (not a new one) and increments the link count for both.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: