From owner-freebsd-current Sat Jun 10 9:39:54 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from peach.ocn.ne.jp (peach.ocn.ne.jp [210.145.254.87]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC66E37B54B; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 09:39:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dcs@newsguy.com) Received: from newsguy.com (p61-dn01kiryunisiki.gunma.ocn.ne.jp [211.0.245.62]) by peach.ocn.ne.jp (8.9.1a/OCN/) with ESMTP id BAA08135; Sun, 11 Jun 2000 01:39:46 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <39426699.472F35D7@newsguy.com> Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 01:02:33 +0900 From: "Daniel C. Sobral" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,pt-BR,ja MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kris Kennaway Cc: "Andrey A. Chernov" , Boris Popov , John LoVerso , current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: mktemp() patch References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Kris Kennaway wrote: > > > Bad example. Not _all_ filenames but temp. ones only which allows to run > > FreeBSD binary in MSDOS FS with MSDOS files. > > The point is the same. Files created by FreeBSD binaries during the course > of operation don't conform to an 8.3 monocase naming scheme (think of > dotfiles for example). I don't believe there's such a thing as a lowest > common denominator of file system naming conventions - either a filesystem > can support UFS names (perhaps through a translation later) or it's not > suitable for running FreeBSD from. With this line of reasoning, why don't you go all the way and add control characters and stuff? They are allowed by ufs, and shell even grok them. In fact, commands such as ls even have flags to deal with them. Kris, IT IS THE APPLICATION THAT DICTATE YOUR NEEDS. The reasoning above would more likely get FreeBSD to be discarded than the FS. If the OS won't bend to the users' need, it will get dumped, period. As we position FreeBSD as a server system, the need to support foreign filesystems WELL increases. FIOFO (with all due respect :). > > mktemp() makes temp files in any directory including current one. > > Yes, but in practice it's not used that way since you can't write to most > directories on the system except ~ and /tmp and relatives. Tell that to vim. :-) -- Daniel C. Sobral (8-DCS) dcs@newsguy.com dcs@freebsd.org capo@yet.another.bsdconspiracy.org Hmmm - I have to go check this. My reality assumptions are shattered. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message