Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 13 Aug 2000 00:53:53 -0400 | From | Rob Landley <> | Subject | Re: NTFS-like streams? |
| |
Alexander Viro wrote: > > On Sat, 12 Aug 2000, Rob Landley wrote: > > > I'm not sure how much of the windows registry is pure fundamental evil > > and how much of it is just really badly implemented. But I -AM- pretty > > sure that once you hit that point, this becomes a user space issue. If > > gnome wants a file full of data attaching properties like icons to > > whatever objects it wants to create to represent files and such in the > > <taking the hat of kernel hacker off> > <putting the hat of sysadmin on> > ... then GNOME can take a hike. No matter what mechanisms are there. It > just should not be done. If you want a program with delusions of OShood - > fine, but some of us just fscking had it with EMACS. And that's completely
Okay, per-program ways of doing this that don't share code and databases are a bad idea, I agree. But that still doesn't mean it can't be done in userspace via generic shared libraries, or that keeping track of this information in kernel space is necessarily the way to go. Are you objecting to the lack of code re-use, or to the fact that too much is being done in user space?
Per-user resource forks in the filesystem complicate ownership enough that they're just BOUND to have some sort of subtle security problem. (How do quotas apply to resource forks? How do write permissions apply to resource forks?)
I think doing it right in the kernel is a LOT more complicated than it seems. But as always, I could be wrong...
Rob
(P.S. Every desktop I've ever seen has had delusions of OShood. It seems to be in the nature of desktops. The two solutions seem to be either to live with it, or to gratuitously move desktop functionality into the kernel.)
- 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/
| |