On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 08:38:22PM +0200, Elad Efrat wrote:
> 
> Basically, you are ruling out an interface that can have near immediate
> benefit to NetBSD for reasons that don't exist. :)

No.  An abstraction that works with "some" filesystems is a bad abstraction.
If there's specific code that would be required to make the implementation
work with NFS, and you don't have time to inclination to write the code,
that's one thing.  But if, because of the design of the thing, it doesn't
work with filesystems that don't look enough like normal filesystems, when
by using a better abstraction, it could, that's not a great idea.

Is it too painful to use file handles?

We have too many special cases for individual filesystems in our tree
already; it makes for a big maintenance hassle.

-- 
  Thor Lancelot Simon	                                     tls@rek.tjls.com

  "We cannot usually in social life pursue a single value or a single moral
   aim, untroubled by the need to compromise with others."      - H.L.A. Hart