[lkml]   [2000]   [Aug]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: NTFS-like streams?
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Aug 2000, Alexander Viro wrote:
> >
> > You know what tar(1) will do with you for that, don't you? Same ->st_ino
> > with different contents... And unlike procfs, here tar is a Reasonable
> > Thing(tm).
> But "tar" won't even _see_ the thing. Unless "tar" starts to know about
> S_IFCOMPLEX. In which case it's a non-issue.


the HFS guys made a point of making the filesystem capable of being
tar-copied. I think that this is a useful feature. It's not that we
can't change tar: We have the source. It's that lots of Unix programs
make assumptions (similar to what tar does) about what a directory
tree looks like. Now you've never wanted to use tar to copy a
/procfs. But it works on NFS.

So, (I must've missed the first part of this discussion) what's wrong
with the HFS way of doing things?

~/myfile (data fork)
~/.resource/myfile (resource fork)

This may not be "generic" enough for abitrarily named forks. Think of
something that IS. It's not all that hard:

~/myfile (data/default fork)
~/.streams/myfile/resource (resource fork)
~/.streams/myfile/Icon (icon fork)
~/.streams/myfile/default (hardlink to ~/myfile )


- Tar-copyable.
- Unix utilities don't see anything odd.
- ls will show you just the "files" (unless -a or -R).


- The resource fork is a bit "far" away from the data
fork. (myfile/data and myfile/resource are indeed closer)

Anything I've missed?


** ** ** +31-15-2137555 **
*-- BitWizard writes Linux device drivers for any device you may have! --*
* Common sense is the collection of *
****** prejudices acquired by age eighteen. -- Albert Einstein ********
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    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean