[lkml]   [2000]   [Sep]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: hfs support for blocksize != 512

On Thu, 31 Aug 2000, J. Dow wrote:

> > Ouch... Why did he do them (links to directories, that is), in the
> > first place?
> Since you asked, but I am warning you that you don't want to know....
> Well, maybe you do - there is a project to port UNIXy tools to every
> platform in existance. While I like some of the people involved just

What, somebody took another try on Software Tools?

> a whole lot I dislike the way they have done it. They attempt to pervert
> other filesystems into UNIX lookalikes. They needed links. They

They did _NOT_ need links to directories. 'Cause they would not have them
on any relatively recent version of UNIX (say it, starting with '85-'86).
They certainly would not have them without suid-root.

> pestered the Commodore people until in desperation to shut them
> up Randall made an effort. As you note, as a filesystem AFFS is not

Sigh... That's what you get for not using ISO9000 properly. Just have a
documented procedure for dealing with stupid buggers and when duh
management tries to press just say that we have to follow it to be
ISO9000-compliant. Works like a charm, _especially_ if the procedure
consists of telling said buggers to fsck off. BTDT.

> well suited to links. (But then a lightweight threaded OS is not well

Frankly, he could do much better, keeping almost the same structure.
* have a hidden directory in root (refered, but with impossible
* when you call link() do the following:
if (target is a primary) {
move target into the hidden directory
create a link entry in the old directory
point it to the moved target
create a link entry pointing to the target's primary
* when you are unlinking the primary move it to hidden directory
* when you are unlinking a link - remove it
* when you are giving up the last reference to primary in the
hidden directory - remove it if all links are already gone.

Simple, effective and avoids all problems with links. Makes for very
simple locking rules. Keeps fs structure same as it is now. I would also
change single-linked lists to double-linked ones (much faster and simpler
lists manipulations), but I can see the reasons to keep the layout.

> suited to several popular GCCisms such as huge amounts of data
> on the stack. It takes programmer discipline to write threaded programs

Yes. And the whole thread was a fine example of people being unable to
understand that. Kernel is as threaded as it gets, there's nothing to
babysit it and BTW, kernel stack is 8K.

> properly. But the results are, in my experience, very well worth it. And
> avoiding stack overflow on small stack spaces is one of the keys
> unless the OS has done what BeOS did by assigning absurd default
> stack spaces to accommodate GeekGadgets.)


> > Hmm... What, format description is not available?
> SFS is a private effort on Hendrix's part. It is wholely unrelated to FFS.
> But it does work on the Amiga, fairly nicely. I'm not sure how much of
> his structures he has released publicly. (It is also in perpetual beta.)

<shrug> Well, it's his code and all such... I wouldn't like to use a
filesystem I can't (in theory) repair by hands, but given a choice between
that and AFFS...

> > > If you want I can bend your ear on things Amiga for longer than your
> > > patience stretches, I suspect. (I've been following the threads
> discussions
> >
> > alt.folklore.computers is -> that way ;-) Let's take it there...
> Private email is easier. I've had my Use(less)Net aversion therapy. (I
> got well and good spoiled by BIX in its prime. It had the highest signal
> to noise ratio I have experienced yet.)

a.f.c is one of the few places that managed to stay in pre-September...

> Er, and if you want info about the latest changes to the RDB spec to
> incorporate into the kernel attempts to read the AFFS boot sectors
> <singsong voice> "I can help you." Er, I am the person guilty for the
> latest perversions. {^_-}

Nah... Try to get m68k folks - the last time I've dealt with _any_
m68k-based boxen was back in '92 (sun3). Sorry, full-time kernel janitor
work takes more than enough time ;-/

> > ObWTF: WTF did these guys drop QNX when they clearly wanted RTOS? Do they
> > have somebody who
> > a) knew the difference between RT and TS and
> > b) knew that Linux is TS?
> Um, it would not be either polite or politic to say what I "really" think
> here or
> anywhere else. I am reserving judgement until I have had a chance to test
> what a full up "elate" can do. I am willing to be (very) surprised.
> The interesting thing is that we need an OS somewhere between QNX and
> Linux.

Once upon a time student came to master and said: "Master, you have taught
us for years and it was good. People of Tao are teaching differently and
those who listen to them are saying that it is also good. And people of
Kung-Tzu are also teaching differently and those who come to listen them
are also saying that it is good. What would happen if you would teach
together?" Master smiled and started to beat the student mercilessly.
Student got Enlightened.

> Sadly it appears that NT is about what fits in the niche and is well
> enough
> known to sell to our customers, theme parks, theaters, cruise ships, and
> other
> venues. It's a small niche. We have fun doing it. And we make enough money
> to finance doing more of it. (And so far the customers are more than passing
> honest, which is amazingly refreshing. And it's amazing fun to walk into a
> place
> like Wonderland in the Toronto area and see their volcano really work
> knowing
> that it is our tool making it go. The looks on the other people's faces are
> rewarding.)


> (Er, by day Loren, my partner, is a mild mannered (hah) OS hacker for
> UniSys. Lately he's been "doing" specialty HALs for their BIG machines.
> He has some interesting opinions about the various OSs out there and
> how people are relearning what he and his buddies learned, often the
> hard way, 20 years ago. He nearly single handedly built some of the
> Burroughs OSs. Chuckle - he was hired to write documentation. They
> discovered he was fixing bugs he found while testing his documentation.
> Suddenly he was tossed into the OS group as a programmer.)

<nods> That's the way it should work - there is a reason why manpages have
BUGS section... Basically, it should be easier to fix the crap than to
document the warts.

Al, currently reading Plan 9 source for recovery - it's nice to read decent
C after wading through crazy perversions a-la drivers/block/DAC960.* ...
Said that, core kernel is more or less decent - definitely kinder on
reader than 4BSD... Fsck, why nobody teaches people to read other's code?
Lions' experiment is the only example I'm aware of. I just love this "I'm
not interested in the things that are there, I have brand-new save-the-world
ideas, whaddya mean 'they had been tried and failed miserably'?" attitude.

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 12:38    [W:0.040 / U:12.104 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site