On Wednesday September 1, [email protected] wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 01:05:40PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> >There's no point to having the kernel export information that is already
> >inherent in the main stream.
Having read this quote a few times in this thread I finally figured
out what was wrong with it.
It seems to imply that "iso9660" shouldn't be in the kernel. After
all, it just exports information that is already in the underlying
device.
It doesn't provide any "mediate multiple access" benefit as a
read-only filesystem doesn't require any mediation between users.
It might provide some caching benefit, but I somehow don't think that
is the reason that it is in the kernel.
Now I'm happy to agree that there is a case for "iso9660" but not for
"tarfs", but I don't think it is that "there's no point to having the
kernel export information that is already [there]"
NeilBrown
On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 04:43:11PM +1000, Neil Brown wrote:
> It seems to imply that "iso9660" shouldn't be in the kernel. After
> all, it just exports information that is already in the underlying
> device.
Some applications do isofs/udf in userspace, DVD playback for example.
> It doesn't provide any "mediate multiple access" benefit as a
> read-only filesystem doesn't require any mediation between users.
Umm... you can have permissions for users and you need the kernel to
determine who can access what.
--cw