>> I would like to propose implementing a file copy system call.
>> I expect the initial reaction to such a proposal would be "feature
>> bloat" but I believe some substantial benefits can be seen possibly
>> making it worthwhile, primarily the following:
>> Copy on write:
> You want cowlink() syscall, not copy() syscall. If they are on different
> partitions, let userspace do the job.
That looks like a knee-jerk reaction to stuff going in the kernel.
I want maximum survival of non-UNIX metadata and maximum performance
for this common operation. Let's say you are telecommuting, and...
You have mounted an SMB share from a Windows XP server.
You need to copy a file that has NTFS security data.
The file is 99 GB in size, on the far side of a 33.6 kb/s modem link.
Now copy this file!
Better yet, maybe you have two mount points or mounted two shares.
Filesystem-specific user tools are abominations BTW. We don't
have reiser-mv, reiser-cp, reiser-gmc, reiser-rm, etc.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to email@example.com
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Dec 15 2001 - 21:00:17 EST