[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: libquota proposal
(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.
>>>> 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 fstab
>>> options any more, we may as well change it to use libquota.
>> I don't understand - surely edquota and repquota go through your
>> proplib interface now?
> We were talking about code like netatalk, which is why I propose
> a public library for this.
Uh, now I really don't understand.
David A. Holland
Main Index |
Thread Index |