I apologize for my bad english. > > Is it really a good idea to create new name in the filesystem tree ? I > > mean, a file must have only one path, create new nodes with binding is > > confusing. > > Why must a file only have one path? This seems like a completely > artificial and unnecessary restriction.
Yes, you are right "Must" is a little bit strong. But, (correct me if i'm wrong) if a program ( view_1.exe ) open "thing.xml" with a dir facet , then the directory "thing" is created in the fs. Suppose an other program ( view_2.exe ) open the same file with a file facet "sort", then a file "thing.sort" is created in the fs. So, as a user if i explore the directory i will see 3 objects which are the same, and if view_1.exe exits then the directory desapear, and same thing if view_2.exe exits. In a user point of view, i think it will be confusing, and even not wanted. In the case of a view used only by programs, the user didn't need or want to have the corresponding file in his fs. Isn't the following case possible ? When a program, wanna access a file, according to the filetype there are several translator that manage a facet for the file. The program choose the facet it need and after that communicate with the corresponding translator. That mean, programs can have a different sub-filesystem rooted at the file if they access it with different translator. > In the case of the Windows setup.exe example, the problem is that setup > discovers the location of the distribution directory by computing the > path to the setup.exe binary, so if you have > > foo/bar/setup.exe > > the setup program assumes that the rest of the installation is described > by a file > > foo/bar/setup.ins I think setup.exe will need to access ./setup.ins. So that put no constraint over the name of the containing directory, so it can be "foo.tar.gz/bar/setup.ins", isn't it ? And, how this problem is handled by the system : Consider a file "foo.gz" that contain 2 file "a.txt" and "b.txt". Suppose a program "p1.exe" open "foo.gz/a.txt" with a translator and want an exclusive access to the file. Suppose a program "gzip" open "foo.gz," and want to update it, whith a fresh "b.txt".Then, gzip need access to rewrite "foo.gz", and then a write access to "foo.gz/b.txt", and that is forbidden by "p1.exe" request. But, gzip don't want to modify "foo.gz/b.txt", so his request don't hurt the "p1.exe" request. How the contradiction is resolved ? Regards, Patrick N. ___________________________________________________________________________ Nouveau : téléphonez moins cher avec Yahoo! Messenger ! Découvez les tarifs exceptionnels pour appeler la France et l'international. Téléchargez sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ L4-hurd mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
