0/cIAvH/H9f/8pSV9ZFlnategQfz+mqymqyqVS9S8M1a70
	U9oFve4eS/3P3E1N/wSjtPCvtRQ/Wp1HlOwKlJ5MbmAYuBLG8mbqWy9CGIOKZ4ScjmVYnar+GMb
	FqSZaq25gFxtqgc23wV6zpNhk1OqCYWf1yjE/aImd2BXwNF0YthaAY5atGY/4FFAf2Oa2xi1ch7
	ZD3wTq3rmgv2Hy/jReQ6Tu27GLo=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFUrFp6lzzEhr6KjECvOWf+sKLWkv4+rRe/qNfYfCLSTzMmiZKy4IQriZEr6rRtXOJuTkKWX8UOMikpeJxxivI=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:5c8:b0:63b:ee76:3f63 with SMTP id
 4fb4d7f45d1cf-63c1e1f21c4mr15272145a12.7.1761002433617; Mon, 20 Oct 2025
 16:20:33 -0700 (PDT)
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current <freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-current
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current+help@freebsd.org>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:freebsd-current+subscribe@freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:freebsd-current+unsubscribe@freebsd.org>
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Rick Macklem <rick.macklem@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2025 16:20:21 -0700
X-Gm-Features: AS18NWApvQIxOeRwtuqU2X65TJNhj6aozYJiwTf_AY2i7Rkd3cQdJYzytH_EkmY
Message-ID: <CAM5tNy7y7RUXjJV1degDTrnG6dOwkkd+a_jOU2ojaFzpFh6Fzg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: RFC: _PC_HAS_HIDDENSYSTEM rename
To: FreeBSD CURRENT <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Spamd-Bar: ---
X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00];
	NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-1.00)[-1.000];
	NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000];
	NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000];
	DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[gmail.com,none];
	R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip6:2a00:1450:4000::/36:c];
	R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[gmail.com:s=20230601];
	MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain];
	ARC_NA(0.00)[];
	TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[];
	FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[];
	RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1];
	DWL_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[gmail.com:dkim];
	RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[];
	FREEMAIL_FROM(0.00)[gmail.com];
	MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+];
	TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[];
	DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[gmail.com:+];
	FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[gmail.com];
	PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-current@freebsd.org];
	FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[];
	TAGGED_FROM(0.00)[];
	MID_RHS_MATCH_FROMTLD(0.00)[];
	MISSING_XM_UA(0.00)[];
	MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-current@freebsd.org];
	RCVD_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1];
	RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[2a00:1450:4864:20::532:from]
X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4crBHR5wbjz3mkZ

Hi

There are three flags UF_HIDDEN, UF_SYSTEM and UF_ARCHIVE
defined in sys/stat.h (their origin is in MS-DOS). If a file system implements
any of these flags, they implement all three of them, afaik.

Commit afd5bc6309 (in main) defined _PC_HAS_HIDDENSYSTEM
to allow pathconf to indicate if a file system supports the first two of
these.
I had ignored the third, since it is listed as "deprecated" in RFC-8881.
It now turns out that the Windows NFSv4.1 client folk want support
for UF_ARCHIVE and consider that it should not be deprecated.

I do not think adding a separate _PC_HAS_ARCHIVE pathconf
name is useful, since it is supported when _PC_HAS_HIDDENSYSTEM
is returned non-zero.

However, the name _PC_HAS_HIDDENSYSTEM is misleading,
so what do others think I should do?
- Add an alias for _PC_HAS_HIDDENSYSTEM called something
 like _PC_HAS_HIDSYSARCH or _PC_HAS_HIDDENSYSTEMARCHIVE?
(Since _PC_HAS_HIDDENSYSTEM is now in the OpenZFS code, it
needs to remain in unistd.h, at least for now.)
Or
- Just leave the name as is and document it correctly in pathconf(2)?

Thanks for any comments, rick