Think of a similar scope of change to a large codebase you’re familiar with, for frame of reference.

  • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    You have misunderstood. No, it wasn’t an existing thing. This is the code that implements it. That’s the point.

    The change to fs/namei.c is the code to handle not following symlinks; the rest is some necessary code to create the option and expose it to userland.

    (Edit: Rereading I do see a little better what you were saying - I actually looked it up and the code that originally implemented not following symlinks, that we’re now adding an or statement to activate, was a 6-line change.)

    • The Octonaut@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Yeah I get that but you dig deeper and that implantation was just throwing an error that needs to be handled elsewhere. The “real” code is what is handling that error.

      But then we’re back to act acknowledging a meaningful point of having commits that do one thing and do it well and understandably, and I’m back to appreciating the difference between the kernel and our app.