Re: commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5: fuse: add FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT flag to INIT

On Nov 15 2016, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 6:27 PM, Nikolaus Rath wrote: > >> Yeah, I'd expect most people to do that. But FUSE file systems are often >> a little more exotic and produce error conditions that don't match well >> with

Re: commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5: fuse: add FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT flag to INIT

On Nov 15 2016, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 6:27 PM, Nikolaus Rath wrote: > >> Yeah, I'd expect most people to do that. But FUSE file systems are often >> a little more exotic and produce error conditions that don't match well >> with any of the codes documented in the

Re: commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5: fuse: add FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT flag to INIT

On Nov 11 2016, Mike Marshall wrote: > There was a memorable place in the Orangefs code where > the original programmer did that (pick something appropriate > from errno.h) and put in a comment about how it was a more > reasonable return code... > > When Al Viro saw it, he

Re: commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5: fuse: add FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT flag to INIT

On Nov 11 2016, Mike Marshall wrote: > There was a memorable place in the Orangefs code where > the original programmer did that (pick something appropriate > from errno.h) and put in a comment about how it was a more > reasonable return code... > > When Al Viro saw it, he said it was: > > ...

Re: commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5: fuse: add FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT flag to INIT

On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 6:27 PM, Nikolaus Rath wrote: > Yeah, I'd expect most people to do that. But FUSE file systems are often > a little more exotic and produce error conditions that don't match well > with any of the codes documented in the manpages. If there is no good >

Re: commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5: fuse: add FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT flag to INIT

On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 6:27 PM, Nikolaus Rath wrote: > Yeah, I'd expect most people to do that. But FUSE file systems are often > a little more exotic and produce error conditions that don't match well > with any of the codes documented in the manpages. If there is no good > fit, I'd expect

Re: commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5: fuse: add FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT flag to INIT

There was a memorable place in the Orangefs code where the original programmer did that (pick something appropriate from errno.h) and put in a comment about how it was a more reasonable return code... When Al Viro saw it, he said it was: ... stupid. Expected error value is not EOPNOTSUPP;

Re: commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5: fuse: add FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT flag to INIT

There was a memorable place in the Orangefs code where the original programmer did that (pick something appropriate from errno.h) and put in a comment about how it was a more reasonable return code... When Al Viro saw it, he said it was: ... stupid. Expected error value is not EOPNOTSUPP;

Re: commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5: fuse: add FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT flag to INIT

On Nov 11 2016, Mike Marshall wrote: > On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Nikolaus Rath wrote: >> On Nov 11 2016, Miklos Szeredi wrote: >>> On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 5:57 AM, Nikolaus Rath wrote: On Nov 11 2016,

Re: commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5: fuse: add FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT flag to INIT

On Nov 11 2016, Mike Marshall wrote: > On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Nikolaus Rath wrote: >> On Nov 11 2016, Miklos Szeredi wrote: >>> On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 5:57 AM, Nikolaus Rath wrote: On Nov 11 2016, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:31 PM, Nikolaus Rath

Re: commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5: fuse: add FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT flag to INIT

I try to choose error codes from the appropriate man page when vfs calls into Orangefs with whatever_operations.action... there's probably better ways, like reading the vfs code and seeing what it expects ... -Mike On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Nikolaus Rath wrote: > On

Re: commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5: fuse: add FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT flag to INIT

I try to choose error codes from the appropriate man page when vfs calls into Orangefs with whatever_operations.action... there's probably better ways, like reading the vfs code and seeing what it expects ... -Mike On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Nikolaus Rath wrote: > On Nov 11 2016, Miklos

Re: commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5: fuse: add FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT flag to INIT

On Nov 11 2016, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 5:57 AM, Nikolaus Rath wrote: >> On Nov 11 2016, Miklos Szeredi wrote: >>> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:31 PM, Nikolaus Rath wrote: Hi Andrew,

Re: commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5: fuse: add FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT flag to INIT

On Nov 11 2016, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 5:57 AM, Nikolaus Rath wrote: >> On Nov 11 2016, Miklos Szeredi wrote: >>> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:31 PM, Nikolaus Rath wrote: Hi Andrew, In commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5 you added a new FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT

Re: commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5: fuse: add FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT flag to INIT

On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 5:57 AM, Nikolaus Rath wrote: > On Nov 11 2016, Miklos Szeredi wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:31 PM, Nikolaus Rath wrote: >>> Hi Andrew, >>> >>> In commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5 you added a new

Re: commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5: fuse: add FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT flag to INIT

On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 5:57 AM, Nikolaus Rath wrote: > On Nov 11 2016, Miklos Szeredi wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:31 PM, Nikolaus Rath wrote: >>> Hi Andrew, >>> >>> In commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5 you added a new FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT >>> flag. But as far as I can tell, the flag is

Re: commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5: fuse: add FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT flag to INIT

On Nov 11 2016, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:31 PM, Nikolaus Rath wrote: >> Hi Andrew, >> >> In commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5 you added a new FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT >> flag. But as far as I can tell, the flag is simply accepted without

Re: commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5: fuse: add FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT flag to INIT

On Nov 11 2016, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:31 PM, Nikolaus Rath wrote: >> Hi Andrew, >> >> In commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5 you added a new FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT >> flag. But as far as I can tell, the flag is simply accepted without >> having any effect (including in

Re: commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5: fuse: add FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT flag to INIT

On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:31 PM, Nikolaus Rath wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > In commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5 you added a new FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT > flag. But as far as I can tell, the flag is simply accepted without > having any effect (including in libfuse). > > I tried to find

Re: commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5: fuse: add FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT flag to INIT

On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:31 PM, Nikolaus Rath wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > In commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5 you added a new FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT > flag. But as far as I can tell, the flag is simply accepted without > having any effect (including in libfuse). > > I tried to find related later

commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5: fuse: add FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT flag to INIT

Hi Andrew, In commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5 you added a new FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT flag. But as far as I can tell, the flag is simply accepted without having any effect (including in libfuse). I tried to find related later commits, but did not find anything either. Am I missing something? Best,

commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5: fuse: add FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT flag to INIT

Hi Andrew, In commit d7afaec0b564f0609e116f5 you added a new FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT flag. But as far as I can tell, the flag is simply accepted without having any effect (including in libfuse). I tried to find related later commits, but did not find anything either. Am I missing something? Best,