Do we really need correct st_nlink count for directories?

Christopher Faylor cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please@cygwin.com
Thu Apr 24 13:11:00 GMT 2008


On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 01:44:40PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>Hi,
>
>As my subject already asks, do we really need correct st_nlink count for
>directories?  Windows doesn't maintain a link count for directories, so
>Cygwin calls a function which evaluates st_nlink for directories by
>scanning the directory and counting all its subdirs.  This is obviously
>time consuming.  That's why we don't do it on remote drives at all.
>Given that we don't do it on remote drives, all tools must be able to
>deal with st_nlink == 1 for directories anyway.  Which, for instance,
>all coreutils tools do.  So, shouldn't we drop this time consuming
>subdir counting on local drives as well?  It doesn't seem to fullfil
>any real need anymore, it's just a performance killer.

I thought find used it.

cgf



More information about the Cygwin-developers mailing list