On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 05:07:56PM +0000, David Holland wrote: > On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 06:45:02PM -0700, Bill Stouder-Studenmund wrote: > > > Hmm. This is not entirely trivial, because for rename (and mkdir, > > > etc.) you need to be able to tell which is the last component before > > > trying to look it up. > > > > I don't think so. mkdir, rename, and such don't need to work on named > > streams. In general, you can't rename named streams, and I think using an > > API other than unlink(2) to remove them is fine. > > > > Mac OS used to have "complex" vnodes, which were files that had named > > forks. They acted like files, but you could do lookups on them. Mac OS no > > longer has them, so I consider them a dead experiment. ;-) > > But there's no reason they should be prohibited by the VFS layer. I believe there is. It adds complexity, and I feel we win nothing for the complexity. Look at all the issues you are having with the complexity we actually use! No one really needs to be able to handle named streams this way, so let's not. Take care, Bill
Attachment:
pgpTZ8ZJN4q8Z.pgp
Description: PGP signature