Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 22:20:51 +0100 From: phk@FreeBSD.ORG To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> Cc: Nate Lawson <nate@root.org>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: setattr() syscall as proposed by phk Message-ID: <81555.1039987251@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 15 Dec 2002 13:11:05 PST." <200212152111.gBFLB5WI093761@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <200212152111.gBFLB5WI093761@apollo.backplane.com>, Matthew Dillon w
rites:
> setattr() and friends do not exist anywhere outside of this proposal.
> I don't particularly like the idea of replacing existing functionality
> with a new non-standard system call. The speed issue alone is not enough
> to justify the change, nor is Kirk's new creation time field (besides
> I thought that field was not supposed to be changeable?).
>
> --
>
> In regards to the implementation itself, I really don't like the idea
> of passing a stat structure as an argument. If we are going to have
> a 'general' setattr() system call it should be extensible. That is,
> something like this:
>
> struct fsattr {
> int token;
> union {
> char pad[32];
> struct timeval tv;
> time_t t;
> etc....
> } fsu;
> }
I don't really like the idea of inventing new oddball structures when
we have perfectly good ones already.
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?81555.1039987251>