[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: libquota proposal
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 03:44:53AM +0000, 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
> > > | > fstab if quotactl fails or the filesystem is not mounted.
> > > |
> > > | That's a bug, or more accurately legacy behavior that doesn't need to
> > > | be supported. Once upon a time (IIRC) df used to fall back to opening
> > > | the block device and examining ffs structures directly; that was
> > > | removed because it violated desirable abstractions.
> > >
> > > Totally agree, please remove this complex and hard to maintain stuff.
> > Once again: this needs to be supported for transition, up to 6.0
> > (inclusive).
> 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 makes sense; furthermore there's no need at all to deal with
> the case where the fs isn't mounted.
repquota at last needs them: it doesn't have any way to get a list
of quotas otherwise (and it's also part of the migration to quota2,
with repquota -x).
> In the new world order all userland quota operations go through the
> kernel interface so they can interact successfully with filesystems
> using either the old or new quota layouts, or with new filesystems
> that may have their own different quota layouts, like zfs or whatever
> else. Right?
right. Exept that the "getall" command is not supported for quota1,
repquota does the job itself.
Manuel Bouyer <bouyer%antioche.eu.org@localhost>
NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference
Main Index |
Thread Index |