Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 10 Jan 2009 17:56:05 -0500
From:      a134qaed@gmail.com
To:        "Tim Kientzle" <kientzle@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Extattr portability?
Message-ID:  <bdf82f800901101456x57c1c1ecmba32e6af6f627622@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4968EF7E.5040002@freebsd.org>
References:  <4965927D.1060507@freebsd.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.0901091525300.78432@fledge.watson.org> <bdf82f800901092341y2459b8bcyd706a6f9aabb47ea@mail.gmail.com> <4968EF7E.5040002@freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 1/10/09, Tim Kientzle <kientzle@freebsd.org> wrote:
> Dylan Cochran wrote:
>>
>
> Wonderful!  Care to help test?

Absolutely.

>
> There's still a lot of open questions about the system
> namespace I'll have to figure out.  Over on the GNU tar
> mailing list, the Linux filesystem folks have been agitating
> for GNU tar to support system extattrs that carry filesystem
> layout hints.  The portability issues with this make my
> head hurt.

Yea, I think in the end it's going to be inherently un-portable, as in
some systems, the system attributes could be filesystem or kernel
specific. And I can forsee some dangerous reprocussions (a collision
on an attribute name in the system namespace, which on one system is
just a tag, like 'page=23', but on another, it's interpreted as a
flagged hint to the dynamic linker, on how to page in the file.....
>
> Tim
>



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bdf82f800901101456x57c1c1ecmba32e6af6f627622>