Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | 14 Aug 2000 23:30:00 +0200 | | From | (Kai Henningsen) | | Subject | Re: NTFS-like streams? |
| |
jas88@cam.ac.uk (James Sutherland) wrote on 14.08.00 in <Pine.LNX.4.10.10008140021190.2852-100000@dax.joh.cam.ac.uk>: > On Sun, 13 Aug 2000, Alexander Viro wrote: > > On Sun, 13 Aug 2000, James Sutherland wrote: > > > > Dealing with aliases hell on VFAT was enough. > > > > > > Eh? This looks like a complete non-sequitur from where I'm sitting. NTFS > > > isn't VFAT, and there are no aliases involved. > > > > > > > Yes, NTFS will miss some of the "wonders" (objects are different, > > > > after all), but even the rest is more than enough. > > > > > > What "wonders", and how would NTFS "miss" them? > > > > There are two sorts of crap in handling namespace on VFAT. > > * you are getting short names. They behave partially as hardlinks, > > partially as hell knows what. They can disappear upon rename (two > > different objects become the same). Name that used to be absent may become > > present just because you've created a file with totally unrelated name. > > You can have several aliases for the same directory. That's the hell NTFS > > may miss. > > IMO, we can drop all that. If NT can, so can we...
... but NT can't.
> Nah. Let's just drop short filenames.
NT still has short filenames. Including on NTFS. What they don't have is dentries.
MfG Kai
- 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/
|  |