Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2025 06:24:54 -0700 From: Rick Macklem <rick.macklem@gmail.com> To: Olivier Certner <olce@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RFC: checking file systems support UF_HIDDEN, UF_SYSTEM Message-ID: <CAM5tNy73MQQ0EET772j1HuZuG0QYrz9tisYis0HDKmwSmvk13w@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <2417127.THHZn3L5Ee@ravel> References: <CAM5tNy5eoY5f-fo9BKc4v34XKXF6%2B6Ae7Zpq=FH7owaSRYSHmw@mail.gmail.com> <CAOtMX2jVdbtGb=%2BCEAbaWF2oiSTD=V=js2HOjQHnpJpCB1i2zw@mail.gmail.com> <2417127.THHZn3L5Ee@ravel>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Thu, Jul 3, 2025 at 1:22 AM Olivier Certner <olce@freebsd.org> wrote: > > Hi Alan, > > > The strcmp method isn't very good, because it doesn't account for the > > possibility that some filesystems may only support the flags conditionally, > > depending on formatting options. I vote for method 1. > > Method 1 does not solve this problem either, as VFCF_* flags are per filesystem *type*, not mounts. That is true. For file systems other than fuse, the property seems to apply to all file systems of the type. I don't know what fuse does? - Does fuse support these at all? (They are not supported by Linux, as far as I know.) Having said the above, I think Kostik's suggestion of a new pathconf variable seems the best, since it will cover all current and future cases. Thanks for the comments, rick > > Regards. > > -- > Olivier Certnerhome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAM5tNy73MQQ0EET772j1HuZuG0QYrz9tisYis0HDKmwSmvk13w>