On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 01:20:10AM +, David Holland wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 08:30:41PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> > looking at pkgsrc/net/netatalk to make it use the new quota interface
> > convinced be that we need a libquota, which can return the quota status
> > for a id in a
[ replying to 4 messages in one, hoping to reduce the number of branches
in this thread ...]
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 12:19:23AM +, David Holland wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 05:10:08PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> > > > > No, it doesn't. Even before you touched anything, they were only
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 08:30:41PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> looking at pkgsrc/net/netatalk to make it use the new quota interface
> convinced be that we need a libquota, which can return the quota status
> for a id in a simple way, as independant as possible from the underlying
> filesyste
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 02:07:50PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> | At this point, in the source 'quota1' is used for the old
> | quota format, 'quota2' for the new one and 'quota' for the few things
> | that are common.
>
> Are we planning to keep quota1 around for more than 6.0? If not, it
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 05:11:21PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
(also, edquota and repquota seem fs-independent to me...)
>>>
>>> no, they're not: they can directly the quota1 file specified in the
>>> fstab if quotactl fails or the filesystem is not mounted.
>>
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 05:10:08PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> > > > No, it doesn't. Even before you touched anything, they were only
> > > > scribbling directly as a fallback if the kernel operations failed.
> > > > The kernel operations should not fail in any case where scribbling
> > > > d
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 03:43:10PM +, David Holland wrote:
> (more context restored)
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 09:51:48AM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> >> (also, edquota and repquota seem fs-independent to me...)
> >
> > no, they're not: they can directly the quota1 file specifi
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 03:45:34PM +, David Holland wrote:
> > > No, it doesn't. Even before you touched anything, they were only
> > > scribbling directly as a fallback if the kernel operations failed.
> > > The kernel operations should not fail in any case where scribbling
> > > directly
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 09:50:16AM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 03:44:53AM +, David Holland wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 05:41:52PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> > > > | > > (also, edquota and repquota seem fs-independent to me...)
> > > > | >
> > > > | >
(more context restored)
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 09:51:48AM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
>> (also, edquota and repquota seem fs-independent to me...)
>
> no, they're not: they can directly the quota1 file specified in the
> fstab if quotactl fails or the filesystem is not mounted
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 03:45:45AM +, David Holland wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 03:21:22PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> > > That's a bug, or more accurately legacy behavior that doesn't need to
> > > be supported.
> >
> > of course it's not nice. But we're talking about existing code
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 03:44:53AM +, David Holland wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 05:41:52PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> > > | > > (also, edquota and repquota seem fs-independent to me...)
> > > | >
> > > | > no, they're not: they can directly the quota1 file specified in the
> > > |
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 03:21:22PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> > That's a bug, or more accurately legacy behavior that doesn't need to
> > be supported.
>
> of course it's not nice. But we're talking about existing code calling the
> legacy quotactl. If we're going to change it to not check
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 05:41:52PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> > | > > (also, edquota and repquota seem fs-independent to me...)
> > | >
> > | > no, they're not: they can directly the quota1 file specified in the
> > | > fstab if quotactl fails or the filesystem is not mounted.
> > |
> >
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 12:19:18PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> On Mar 22, 1:10pm, dholland-t...@netbsd.org (David Holland) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: libquota proposal
>
> | On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 02:21:26PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> | > > (also, edquota and repquot
On Mar 22, 1:10pm, dholland-t...@netbsd.org (David Holland) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: libquota proposal
| On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 02:21:26PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
| > > (also, edquota and repquota seem fs-independent to me...)
| >
| > no, they're not: they can directl
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 01:10:46PM +, David Holland wrote:
> [...
>
> That's a bug, or more accurately legacy behavior that doesn't need to
> be supported.
of course it's not nice. But we're talking about existing code calling the
legacy quotactl. If we're going to change it to not check the
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 02:21:26PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> > (also, edquota and repquota seem fs-independent to me...)
>
> no, they're not: they can directly the quota1 file specified in the
> fstab if quotactl fails or the filesystem is not mounted.
That's a bug, or more accurately leg
On Mar 21, 8:29pm, bou...@antioche.eu.org (Manuel Bouyer) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: libquota proposal
| On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 03:22:18PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
| > On Mar 21, 5:25pm, bou...@antioche.eu.org (Manuel Bouyer) wrote:
| > -- Subject: Re: libquota proposal
| >
| > |
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 03:22:18PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> On Mar 21, 5:25pm, bou...@antioche.eu.org (Manuel Bouyer) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: libquota proposal
>
> | > We should get rid of quota1 and this direct support.
> |
> | maybe, but after 6.0.
>
> B
On Mar 21, 5:25pm, bou...@antioche.eu.org (Manuel Bouyer) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: libquota proposal
| > We should get rid of quota1 and this direct support.
|
| maybe, but after 6.0.
But then are you going to go back and change quota2->quota?
And if yes, why not now?
christos
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 11:47:38AM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> On Mar 21, 2:21pm, bou...@antioche.eu.org (Manuel Bouyer) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: libquota proposal
>
> | On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 01:18:28PM +, David Holland wrote:
> | > On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 06:19:
On Mar 21, 2:21pm, bou...@antioche.eu.org (Manuel Bouyer) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: libquota proposal
| On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 01:18:28PM +, David Holland wrote:
| > On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 06:19:30PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
| > > > > At this point, in the source 'quo
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 01:18:28PM +, David Holland wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 06:19:30PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> > > > At this point, in the source 'quota1' is used for the old
> > > > quota format, 'quota2' for the new one and 'quota' for the few things
> > > > that are common.
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 06:19:30PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> > > At this point, in the source 'quota1' is used for the old
> > > quota format, 'quota2' for the new one and 'quota' for the few things
> > > that are common.
> >
> > Everything outside the kernel should be in the last categor
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 02:07:50PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> On Mar 19, 5:45pm, bou...@antioche.eu.org (Manuel Bouyer) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: libquota proposal
>
> | > Everywhere? If "quota2" is going to be the standard quota and the old one
> | > is goi
On Mar 19, 5:45pm, bou...@antioche.eu.org (Manuel Bouyer) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: libquota proposal
| > Everywhere? If "quota2" is going to be the standard quota and the old one
| > is going to be deprecated, then it is better to call it "quota" and rename
| > the ol
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 05:14:10PM +, David Holland wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 05:45:38PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> > > Everywhere? If "quota2" is going to be the standard quota and the old one
> > > is going to be deprecated, then it is better to call it "quota" and
> rename
> >
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 05:45:38PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> > Everywhere? If "quota2" is going to be the standard quota and the old one
> > is going to be deprecated, then it is better to call it "quota" and rename
> > the old one.
>
> At this point, in the source 'quota1' is used for th
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 11:35:15AM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> On Mar 19, 12:24pm, bou...@antioche.eu.org (Manuel Bouyer) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: libquota proposal
>
> | On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 12:14:38AM +, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> | > >is there absolutely no chance
On Mar 19, 12:24pm, bou...@antioche.eu.org (Manuel Bouyer) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: libquota proposal
| On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 12:14:38AM +, Christos Zoulas wrote:
| > >is there absolutely no chance for old code to work with the new
| > >kernel? if it's simply making it use
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 11:01:16PM +1100, matthew green wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 09:40:18AM +1100, matthew green wrote:
> > >
> > > this seems reasonable to me. why don't you stick it in libutil?
> > >
> > > > As this is needed to get netatalk to build again on HEAD, I'd like
> > >
> On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 09:40:18AM +1100, matthew green wrote:
> >
> > this seems reasonable to me. why don't you stick it in libutil?
> >
> > > As this is needed to get netatalk to build again on HEAD, I'd like
> > > to commit this in the next few days.
> >
> > this is what i'm talking abou
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 12:14:38AM +, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> >is there absolutely no chance for old code to work with the new
> >kernel? if it's simply making it use the old quotactl() calls,
> >then please reconsider renaming the new syscall to something
> >else, as discussed on the prior t
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 09:40:18AM +1100, matthew green wrote:
>
> this seems reasonable to me. why don't you stick it in libutil?
>
> > As this is needed to get netatalk to build again on HEAD, I'd like
> > to commit this in the next few days.
>
> this is what i'm talking about about using a d
this seems reasonable to me. why don't you stick it in libutil?
> As this is needed to get netatalk to build again on HEAD, I'd like
> to commit this in the next few days.
this is what i'm talking about about using a different name for
the new syscall that takes totally different arguments.
is
36 matches
Mail list logo
