Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 4 Mar 1999 10:26:46 +1100 | From | Richard Gooch <> | Subject | Re: EXT2_UNRM_FL |
| |
Theodore Y. Ts'o writes: > Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 16:01:12 -0500 (EST) > From: Alexander Viro <viro@math.psu.edu> > > It's fairly easy to implement, though. One line in > fs/namei.c::may_delete(), one line in fs/nfsd/vfs.c::nfsd_link(), pair of > #define's in fs.h and one more line in fs/ext2/inode.c::ext2_read_inode(). > If somebody wants it I will include it into the next portion of VFS > cleanup that will be submitted to Linus - it obviously doesn't affect > anything else. Final decision belongs to Linus, indeed, but I think that > it's worth doing. > > How were you planning on implementing it? It's not too hard to > translate a unlink to a rename call, and move the file to some > directory; but handling (a) undeleting the inode, (b) security so that > users can't see other people's deleted files, and (c) automatically > deleting "deleted" files when the filesystem needs space, all starts > making the problem a lot harder....
(d) why not do it in userspace anyway? I did that years ago, although I "moved" files to /tmp, but it would be easy enough to move to a garbage/$LOGNAME directory on the same FS.
My rm replacement even purged the oldest files if the rubbish bin area was too full.
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/
| |