tech-userlevel archive

[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

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index