[lkml]   [2000]   [Aug]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: NTFS-like streams?

On Mon, 14 Aug 2000, James Sutherland wrote:

> > Sorry? I do rename("foo","bar"); Suddenly foo:splat becomes bar:splat.
> > Which of them should I drop?
> What has that got to do with short filenames?

Sigh... OK, I really need more coffee. Let me put it that way: this
behaviour (names migrating as the result of operation on different names)
has really nasty implications. On VFAT we had it due to short names. Your
proposal on NTFS promises the same sort of fun. Experience from dealing
with the shortname problems on VFAT makes me rather unhappy about your

> There is a decision to be made: does renaming "foo" to "bar" rename
> "foo:splat" to "bar:splat". It would do under NT; OTOH, this isn't NT, and
> we cannot enforce this across all filesystems which may contain a
> "foo:splat". I'd go with "foo" != "foo:splat". Keep the two distinct.

They are _not_ distinct in the beginning. OK, NTFS is claimed to support
links. I bet that they apply to the whole bunch of forks/whatever, not to
the individual components. rename() will do...?

Are there separate permissions/ownership on these beasts? Welcome to fun
with rename() that happens to split them (and that will be any rename in
your variant).

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:58    [W:0.138 / U:0.148 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site