Mo McKinlay wrote:
> If the support was in the kernel for it, and subsequently a runtime
> library (libfork?), adding conditional code to fileutils would be fairly
> trivial, I would've thought. An autoconf test for the presence of fork
> support would be pretty easy to do.
I had proposed adding a CopyFile()-type routine to libc (or perhaps
'libvfs' or some such) to support streams/attributes/forks. Reference my
reply to Tso's concerns about extended attributes -- they should really
be used for only convenience data by programs anyway. Currently, even NT
(the OS with the most generalized named streams support) throws away all
named streams silently when copying to a non-streams-aware FS.
> Hmm, perhaps I shouldn't talk about Microsoft's implementation strategies
> on the LKML *grin*
Heh. David Cutler's a pretty smart guy. Overlook
that whole "win32" debacle and NT's not a bad OS... :)
As Linus said, there's not FS on Linux that currently
supports named streams, so it's an untestable proposition
currently. We're developing a cross-platform filesystem
that does support them. However, we've temporarily
backported to 2.2.16 in order to get features work
done w/o having to shoot at a moving target. We will
be porting back to 2.4 when it settles down a little.
Perhaps then we can test it?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Aug 15 2000 - 21:00:26 EST