Re: I think I was badly misunderstood, it's all optional
Richard Gooch (rgooch@atnf.csiro.au)
Fri, 2 Jul 1999 10:57:14 +1000
Hans Reiser writes:
>
> If you don't create a file with the same name as the directory, and set
> it to inherit the body of the files in the directory, and modify all of
> the files to inherit the stat data of the directory (I'll not specify
> how inheritance gets turned on, I need to think about several
> alternatives some more, I like the loic@ceic.com /fscontrol idea
> though...), and you don't read/write to files that begin with ".." in the
> filename without first creating them (creating a file with the same name
> as the filter overrides the filter), then you remain blissfully unaware
> of these changes. You are welcome to suggest a better prefix than ".."
> for me to give special meaning to it.
>
> Did you really think I would make it somehow mandatory? No wonder you
> guys were in a tizzy....
If you could clarify: suppose I had an albod (written by KWord or
whatever). Will I still be able to use my existing tools such that the
directory appears as a directory (i.e. for stat() and open()
purposes)?
Another question, since it hasn't been made clear to me: which
problem(s) are you trying to solve by adding new semantics for
directories?
I'm assuming the new semantics are that read(2)ing a directory yields
the "default" data fork (is this assumption correct?).
Regards,
Richard....
-
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/