On Wed, 6 Oct 1999, Pat Dirks wrote:
> I'm sorry I didn't mention it in my original post but the plan is that
> whenever a filesystem is "adopted" and the permissions are overwritten
> the filesystem's ID is changed to prevent it being recognized as "local"
> to any systems that previously knew it. If the filesystem's "adopted"
> while retaining the privileges, the systems that recognize the filesystem
> as "local" must be able to make sense of the same set of IDs (because
> they're all from the same source, for instance) and it makes sense to
> leave the filesystem ID unchanged. It must be possible to have a disk
> that I can swap between two systems here on the floor when I know there
> are no conflicting name <-> ID mappings, in which case the two systems
> must know the filesystem in question by the same filesystem ID.
One question, does the design take in to account a group of machines which
share a set of fs IDs? I ask because otherwise, you couldn't have adopted
filesystems that work in a computer lab environment where you have no
choice to assume all the machines are identical without some really
extreme pain.
-- Brooks
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
