From owner-cvs-all Sun Apr 8 7:45:25 2001 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD60037B422; Sun, 8 Apr 2001 07:45:21 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) Received: from critter (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f38EjHC01480; Sun, 8 Apr 2001 16:45:17 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/fs/pseudofs pseudofs.c pseudofs.h pseudofs_fileno.c pseudofs_internal.h pseudofs_vncache.c pseudofs_vnops.c In-Reply-To: Your message of "08 Apr 2001 15:39:54 +0200." Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2001 16:45:17 +0200 Message-ID: <1478.986741117@critter> From: Poul-Henning Kamp Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message , Dag-Erling Smorgrav writes: >Poul-Henning Kamp writes: >> In message , Dag-Erling Smorgrav writes: >> > It supplies a common framework for procfs, linprocfs and other similar >> > fs'es (e.g. kernfs, if we hadn't nuked it). >> So basically the "UFS" off pseudo-FS's ? > >I don't know the fs system well enough to fully understand your >question. UFS is the generic naming layer for FFS. FFS only does the layout stuff, it doesn't worry about filenames at all, only inodes. I pressume your pseudofs in a similar way hides all the directory handling for virtual filesystems ? -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message