From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S268297AbUH2UWP (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Aug 2004 16:22:15 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S268301AbUH2UWO (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Aug 2004 16:22:14 -0400 Received: from rwcrmhc11.comcast.net ([204.127.198.35]:27111 "EHLO rwcrmhc11.comcast.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S268297AbUH2UUH (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Aug 2004 16:20:07 -0400 X-Comment: AT&T Maillennium special handling code - c Subject: Re: silent semantic changes with reiser4 From: Nicholas Miell To: Hans Reiser Cc: Linus Torvalds , Helge Hafting , Rik van Riel , Spam , Jamie Lokier , David Masover , Diego Calleja , christophe@saout.de, vda@port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua, christer@weinigel.se, Andrew Morton , wichert@wiggy.net, jra@samba.org, hch@lst.de, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Kernel Mailing List , flx@namesys.com, reiserfs-list@namesys.com, Al Viro In-Reply-To: <41323436.80007@namesys.com> References: <20040828170515.GB24868@hh.idb.hist.no> <4131074D.7050209@namesys.com> <4131A3B2.30203@namesys.com> <41323436.80007@namesys.com> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1093810490.2766.8.camel@entropy> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 (1.4.6-2.njm.1) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 13:14:50 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 2004-08-29 at 12:53, Hans Reiser wrote: > With your model, can I do: > > cat filenameA/metas/permissions > filenameB/metas/permissions > runat filenameA "cat permissions" | runat filenameB "cat > permissions" > find / -exec cat {}/permissions \; | grep 4777 | wc -l find / -exec runat {} "cat permissions" \; | grep 4777 | wc -l Although, whether or not the kernel exposes file permissions as an attribute named permissions is up to the filesystem. (And the wrong thing to do, in my opinion, but that's irrelevant.) > If yes, then we are talking past each other somehow rather than > disagreeing. If metafiles can be opened with both open and openat() in > your model, then we are discussing some small detail. It can be opened by both, but in order to do it via open(2), you need to fchdir(2) to the attribute directory as returned by openat(2) and then use a relative pathname. > I think the answer is no though, in which case you are missing the point > of the new design. Is the answer no? -- Nicholas Miell From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicholas Miell Subject: Re: silent semantic changes with reiser4 Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 13:14:50 -0700 Message-ID: <1093810490.2766.8.camel@entropy> References: <20040828170515.GB24868@hh.idb.hist.no> <4131074D.7050209@namesys.com> <4131A3B2.30203@namesys.com> <41323436.80007@namesys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Linus Torvalds , Helge Hafting , Rik van Riel , Spam , Jamie Lokier , David Masover , Diego Calleja , christophe@saout.de, vda@port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua, christer@weinigel.se, Andrew Morton , wichert@wiggy.net, jra@samba.org, hch@lst.de, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Kernel Mailing List , flx@namesys.com, reiserfs-list@namesys.com, Al Viro Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com To: Hans Reiser In-Reply-To: <41323436.80007@namesys.com> List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Sun, 2004-08-29 at 12:53, Hans Reiser wrote: > With your model, can I do: > > cat filenameA/metas/permissions > filenameB/metas/permissions > runat filenameA "cat permissions" | runat filenameB "cat > permissions" > find / -exec cat {}/permissions \; | grep 4777 | wc -l find / -exec runat {} "cat permissions" \; | grep 4777 | wc -l Although, whether or not the kernel exposes file permissions as an attribute named permissions is up to the filesystem. (And the wrong thing to do, in my opinion, but that's irrelevant.) > If yes, then we are talking past each other somehow rather than > disagreeing. If metafiles can be opened with both open and openat() in > your model, then we are discussing some small detail. It can be opened by both, but in order to do it via open(2), you need to fchdir(2) to the attribute directory as returned by openat(2) and then use a relative pathname. > I think the answer is no though, in which case you are missing the point > of the new design. Is the answer no? -- Nicholas Miell