To: viro@ftp.linux.org.uk
CC: akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
In-reply-to: <20051025083947.GN7992@ftp.linux.org.uk> (message from Al Viro on
	Tue, 25 Oct 2005 09:39:47 +0100)
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] FUSE improvements + VFS changes
References: <E1EU5RZ-0005qg-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu> <20051025042728.GK7992@ftp.linux.org.uk> <E1EUHni-0006ue-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu> <E1EUIr7-0006zX-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu> <20051025083947.GN7992@ftp.linux.org.uk>
Message-Id: <E1EUKb2-000775-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu>
From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 10:55:52 +0200
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1329
Lines: 37

> > > > > The limitations are:
> > > > > 
> > > > >   1) open("foo", O_CREAT | O_WRONLY, 0444) or similar won't work
> > > > > 
> > > > >   2) ftruncate on a file not having write permission (but file opened
> > > > >      in write mode) will fail
> > > > > 
> > > > >   3) statfs() cannot return different values based on the path within
> > > > >      a filesystem
> > > > 
> > > >     4) mass of a body cannot vary depending on the way it's turned.
> > > > 
> > > > Horrible limitations, all of them...
> > > 
> > > Troll.
> > > 
> > > We have solution for 1-3, what's your's for 4?
> > 
> > And in case you're wondering, 1-2 are mandated by SUS, and obscure
> > programs like "cp" depend on 1) for example.  So it's not as if these
> > limitations were all that fair.
> 
> (1) and (2) are real, no arguments here.  It's statfs one that is
> bogus (and yes, I should've trimmed the quoted part better).

OK, let's say it's bogus.

I still believe, the one local filesystem - many remote filesystems is
a valid model, but it's pretty low priority.  But it'll come back yet!

Miklos

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/