A common VFS and a Common conf-system (Was: namespacing)

[Waldo Bastian]

On Tuesday 01 March 2005 20:25, Mike Hearn wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 23:45:59 -0500, Sean Middleditch wrote:
> > Unfortunately, it's Linux only, and has an incredibly brain-dead design
> > where you have to utilize "round-trips" through the kernel for something
> > that essentially happens entirely in user-space, and forces a superbly
> > poor API (POSIX) onto all its file systems, including those where POSIX
> > makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
>
> Zen question: If a filesystem can't support POSIX, does that mean it's
> not really a filesystem at all?

I think "not really" is captured quite nicely by the word "virtual"

For a VFS system I think the point is that POSIX doesn't provide the stuff 
that you actually want to have (copy file?). It should be reasonable 
straightforward to provide POSIX-like semantics on top of a VFS as long as 
you are prepared to handle a more than usual amount of ENOTSUPP error codes.

Cheers,
Waldo
-- 
bastian at kde.org   |   Free Novell Linux Desktop 9 Evaluation Download
bastian at suse.com  |   http://www.novell.com/products/desktop/eval.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xdg/attachments/20050301/072bf6ac/attachment.pgp