Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2006 10:32:37 -0800 From: Mark Day <mday@apple.com> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Add a file flag for "hidden" files? Message-ID: <5D13DC0E-0ABB-4A3C-B760-18BC2E978DB0@apple.com> In-Reply-To: <20060301182001.W40707@fledge.watson.org> References: <DBD69E00-A9CB-45BA-8398-2A662D18D781@apple.com> <20060301182001.W40707@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mar 1, 2006, at 10:22 AM, Robert Watson wrote:
> I don't see any problem with this. The only flag I know of in
> FreeBSD that might not appear in Mac OS X is the system snapshot
> flag, which was added to UFS after Apple forked from the FreeBSD
> source.
Mac OS X is missing both the NOUNLINK and the SNAPSHOT flags.
Since Mac OS X doesn't implement the functionality corresponding to
either bit, my plan was to leave those #defines commented out in the
Mac OS X headers, with a comment indicating we don't implement that
functionality. I'm a little concerned that an app might see those
bits defined, try to use the functionality, and be surprised when it
doesn't work as expected.
> We have talked about adding a flag to hint the presence of extended
> ACL data also, so that applications know if they should rely solely
> on stat() for protection information, or also call acl_get_
> {fd,file,link}() to receive extended ACL data for ls(1) output. Is
> your plan to mask hidden files solely in user space, or to look at
> masking it in kernel also?
I knew I'd forgotten to mention something. The plan is that this bit
is purely a hint to user space. It's up to the application
(especially a GUI) to decide whether to show a hidden file to the
user or not.
-Mark
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5D13DC0E-0ABB-4A3C-B760-18BC2E978DB0>