>> Jeremy wants in the FS what he can get with Microsoft streams and
>> Macintosh forks. That is, he wants to be able to name an object, and
>> read it, and get something, and he wants to be able to add something
>> that goes into that object, and stays with it when the object gets moved.
>> He wants this because he is a Samba author, and it will make his life a
>> lot easier to have it when Windows 2000 comes out.
> Oops. Should not he do it himself? This will make samba non-portable
> and what is worse samba will not run on ext2.
There are several answers to that...
Samba remains portable, minus Windows 2000 emulation.
It is easy to enhance ext2 in the same way.
If ext2 and BSD don't evolve, they die. Problem?
>> Next files need to be able to inherit stat data, so that a file can
>> share its modification time with its parent directory, so that modifying
>> the file changes the mod time on the directory.
> Is sharing modtime this critical? I can see samba asking for both
> times and then just exporting the newer one :-).
Not "both" but "all 2042". That would kill performance.
With tiny little (sub-)files, the stat data starts to take up
a significant chunk of space.
There is also a correctness issue. This reminds me of the bugs
in Linux threads. We don't really define the larger container,
so the little bits (threads or sub-files) get out of sync.
> This should be done in userspace. Editing /etc/passwd is certainly not
> performance critical so podfuk is just the right
> answer. (http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/podfuk/podfuk.html).
I hope you realize that "podfuk" will not be very successful in the US.
The sound of "podfuk" brings to mind sexual activity with vegatables.
Businesses in the US are very concerned about sexual harassment lawsuits.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to email@example.com
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/