Comment 3 for bug 809370

As it stands this bug is just about making sure when a hard-link is created we properly detect its content and make a put_content call, but I wonder if it shouldn't in fact be about adding proper support for hard-links? Making the put_content call when a hard-link is created would be a first step, but we'd have no guarantee that further changes made locally to the content would be picked by the syncdaemon (e.g. if I have f1 and f2 pointing to the same content in my fs, but only f1 synced to U1, if I edit f2 the content in U1 will not be updated).