> > But it's has various dawbacks, like rmdir doesn't work if there are
> > open files within an otherwise empty directory.
> >
> > I'd happily accept suggestions on how to deal with this differenty.
>
> NFS has that problem because it really has to sillyrename into the same
> directory. I don't
> But it's has various dawbacks, like rmdir doesn't work if there are
> open files within an otherwise empty directory.
>
> I'd happily accept suggestions on how to deal with this differenty.
NFS has that problem because it really has to sillyrename into the same
directory. I don't see that ssh/s
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 03:18:10PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > > Or not support such a broken protocol at all.
> >
> > Wonder what people would say if we removed support for NFSv[23].
> >
> > Just because a protocol does not support "perfect" UNIX semantics, it
> > doesn't mean it's broken
On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 03:18:10PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > Or not support such a broken protocol at all.
>
> Wonder what people would say if we removed support for NFSv[23].
>
> Just because a protocol does not support "perfect" UNIX semantics, it
> doesn't mean it's broken. By that sta
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 03:06:06PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > A file isn't deleted while there are still links or open files
> > refering to it. So getting the attributes for a file with nlink==0 is
> > perfectly valid while the file is still open.
>
> Is it? Why not just pretend that th
> > If a network filesystem protocol can't handle operations (be it data
> > or metadata) on an unlinked file, we must do sillirenaming, so that
> > the file is not actually unlinked.
>
> Or not support such a broken protocol at all.
Wonder what people would say if we removed support for NFSv[23]
On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 03:06:06PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> A file isn't deleted while there are still links or open files
> refering to it. So getting the attributes for a file with nlink==0 is
> perfectly valid while the file is still open.
Is it? Why not just pretend that the attributes
On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 03:06:06PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> If a network filesystem protocol can't handle operations (be it data
> or metadata) on an unlinked file, we must do sillirenaming, so that
> the file is not actually unlinked.
Or not support such a broken protocol at all.
-
To unsu
> > > and if that means adding silly rename support so be it.
> >
> > That's what is done currently.
> >
> > But it's has various dawbacks, like rmdir doesn't work if there are
> > open files within an otherwise empty directory.
> >
> > I'd happily accept suggestions on how to deal with this dif
On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 02:48:08PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > and if that means adding silly rename support so be it.
>
> That's what is done currently.
>
> But it's has various dawbacks, like rmdir doesn't work if there are
> open files within an otherwise empty directory.
>
> I'd happily
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 02:24:54PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > Thanks to everyone for the feedback. Here's two of the VFS patches
> > reworked according to comments. I also plan to rework the setattr()
> > patch accordingly and perhaps the xattr patch, altough that is the
> > lowest priori
On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 02:24:54PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> Thanks to everyone for the feedback. Here's two of the VFS patches
> reworked according to comments. I also plan to rework the setattr()
> patch accordingly and perhaps the xattr patch, altough that is the
> lowest priority.
>
> C
12 matches
Mail list logo
