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>