5 ms·
It was definitely not chosen for ease of implementation, as Apple had to modify core file system functionality, adding support for hard links to directories as
by rarrrrrr 17y ago
It was definitely not chosen for ease of implementation, as Apple had to modify core file system functionality, adding support for hard links to directories as well as files in HFS+ which is fraught with peril if not implemented just right. Users just don't want a backup utility to use any significant amount of CPU and slow down their machine.
- jrg 17y agoAs a side note, it has always been possible (on UFS at least) to link directories. It just gets a bit messy at fsck time, and older shells get a bit confused with 'cd ..' Apple's implementation could have avoided linking directories - by creating new directories each time but always linking the files inside them - though I suspect that they decided it would be far quicker to replicate entire trees if you knew nothing in them had changed.