On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 03:32:36AM +0000, David Holland wrote: > On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 10:03:06PM +0200, Adam Hoka wrote: > > > > > Other fses with their own rename implementations whose locking is > > > > > clearly wrong include tmpfs, msdosfs, udf, and nilfs. > > > > > > As opposed to ffs? What's your point? > > > > I think he meant that it's most likely to be used in a production > > environment. > > And ffs isn't? I still don't get the point.
Didn't you just say that ffs is already fixed? If so, then it seems to me like fixing tmpfs might be a better next step than fixing lfs (unless there's something about lfs that makes it particular easy to fix). eric