Messages in this thread | | | From | (Jens-Uwe Mager) | Subject | Re: Implementing Meta File information in Linux | Date | Sun, 13 Sep 1998 15:53:03 GMT |
| |
In article <mng==199809130043.UAA25527@dcl.MIT.EDU>, "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@MIT.EDU> wrote:
> This brings me back to my first observation --- it's not at all clear > how useful file metadata really is. Could one of the advocates of file > metadata give me an actual proposed application which could profitably > use it?
One of the main points that need clarification is resource forks are not metadata. On the Mac each file has two forks, that is the point why you need to binhex it as it would loose data transferred to a conventional file system. The use of multiforked file system is debatable, this can probably be represented with other means less painless, although you will face consistency issues (how to atomically rename a multiforked file simulated with multiple conventional files?).
Meta data (on the Mac) is stored in the directory entry of every file, and is mostly used by the user interface. For example the file types save you from having to have special suffixes on your file names. I really hate it if a system insists to put a .doc at the end of the file name just to be able to double click the document to able to open it. Another very useful feature is used by my FTP client, it puts the URL of a downloaded file into the comment meta data field.
Again it is possible to store such information seperately. But it is much easier if I rm a file and the comment field just disappears automagically. -- Jens-Uwe Mager <pgp-mailto:62CFDB25>
- 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/faq.html
| |