Re: How to go on with ISO 9660 large file support ?

["Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup%gmx.net@localhost>]

Hi,

Wolfgang Solfrank:
> I'm a bit scarce on round tuits right now,

The global tuits shortage crisis is of course a big obstacle.
Especially since ISO 9660 is essential when booting installation
CDs or DVDs. I plan to repack NetBSD-6.1.3-i386.iso with my
development kernel and to perform an installation.
(It is not nice of makefs to hide the El Torito boot image in
 blind space. No i have to guess its size.)

Currently i am looking for critical comments and questions about
the overall implementation concept.

A decision would be nice, whether API compatibility for cd9660_node.h
is worth an extra pointer in each iso_node (= vnode.v_data).
As stated, fstat(1) would be affected by an API break. On the other
hand, half of my CVS /usr/src seems to suffer from API problems with
the NetBSD-6.1.3 system installation.

Heavy testing makes sense only after this decision.


> RRIP doesn't have the concept of multiple versions of a file.

Yes. It looks funny if there is more than one ISO file version
which all have the same RRIP name. I tested this. My proposal
showed the best results among the tested systems.


> What 6.1.3 do you refer to here? 

NetBSD-6.1.3 i386. The host operating system is Debian 6 amd64.
My development subject from CVS refers to itself as NetBSD-6.99.40
(#190 meanwhile).


> Regarding associated files, I saw those used by Apple for their
> resource fork.  Albeit I haven't seen any ISOs with them recently.

Probably i will have to fake some by hand.
This implies the risk, though, that i got the specs wrong in both
cases. A real test case would be much more significant.

In general i would say that large files are much more common than
Associated Files, multiple Versions, or ISO 9660 Extended Attributes.
So even if there is a risk to break those, it still seems worth.


Have a nice day :)

Thomas