[cap-talk] Petname definition: MinorCtkrFs, are these petnames?

[Toby Murray]

On Thu, 2009-01-29 at 15:00 +0100, Rob Meijer wrote:
> On Thu, January 29, 2009 12:52, Toby Murray wrote:
> > On Thu, 2009-01-29 at 12:38 +0100, Rob Meijer wrote:
> >> With the resent discussion on the definition of petnames, I started to
> >> doubt
> >> if what I use and call petnames in MinorCtkrFs are actualy petnames.
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> >> Does my usage of the 'petname' term concur with how others feel petnames
> >> are defined, or am I stretching the petname concept beyond its meaning?
> >
> > Given an <ATTENUATED SPARSECAP> and an
> > <ATTENUATION DIRECTORY NODE SPARSECAP>,  is there a way to use
> > <ATTENUATION DIRECTORY NODE SPARSECAP> to find out what petname, if any,
> > <ATTENUATED SPARSECAP> corresponds to? If so, then I'd say that these
> > are petnames with petnamespaces defined by <ATTENUATION DIRECTORY NODE
> > SPARSECAP>s. Otherwise, they're just ordinary (lambda)names.
> 
> That would be:
> 
> find <ATTENUATION DIRECTORY NODE SPARSECAP> -type f -exec attr -g attn {}
> \; | grep <ATTENUATED SPARSECAP>
> 
> That would return something like:
> 
> Attribute "attn" had a 57 byte value for <ATTENUATION DIRECTORY NODE
> SPARSECAP>/<PETNAME>: <ATTENUATED SPARSECAP>
> 

I forgot to add: Does the system prevent you from creating more than one
petname (within a particular petnamespace) for the same capability?

Cheers

Toby