Messages in this thread | | | From | Denis Vlasenko <> | Subject | Re: [prepatch] address_space-based writeback | Date | Sat, 4 May 2002 22:46:27 -0200 |
| |
On 3 May 2002 19:50, Anton Altaparmakov wrote: > > > Changing unix is doable _if_ you can show a significant benefit. > > > The more utilities you want to break, the more benefit you need to > > > show. I don't think you can send the inode to the land of > > > "8-char limited passwords" by pushing "simpler management of fstabs" > > > though. > > > >I'm afraid I can't present benefits big enough. > > > >I was thinking of fs driver (NFS,reiser,NTFS,FAT,...) developers' > >pain, not about my /etc/fstab editing. > > NTFS has native inode numbers which are persistent across reboot so this is > a non-issue. The only thing is that inode numbers on ntfs are 64 bit and > not 32 bit but that is much a user space issue as a kernel issue...
Sure it is fixable, we can slowly drift to 64bit inodes in libc.
OTOH, why I have this subtle feeling that there is (or will be) SuperHyperDuperFS with 128bit inodes?
That is one reason why I don't like inode numbers. -- vda - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |