Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: NTFS-like streams? | Date | Sun, 13 Aug 2000 20:54:08 +0100 (BST) | From | Alan Cox <> |
| |
> Quite frankly, _eventually_ we'll have to bite the bullet and handle > resource forks. Maybe HFS will continue to use the current setup. Who > knows? But wouldn't it be nice to have a unified way of handling it? And > complain all you like, but the HFS way just cannot be the unified way.
I'd very much like it to be unified. I can see that very well. It needs to be unified in a way I can serve it over NFS to boxes that dont make that assumption and create the same layout trivially on a non resource forked fs.
> At the very least, I hope the virtual ".resource" directory is the same > physical inode as the directory it resides in, because otherwise the basic > "dir->i_sem" concurrency protection simply won't work.
If it has the same inode number lots of other stuff breaks so I fear it doesnt
Im not arguing about needing to do something. I just think the solutions so far all have large holes in them. And no - I dont have a better one to offer 8(
Alan
- 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/
| |