Date: Wed, 5 May 2004 18:08:51 -0700 From: Gordon Tetlow <gordon@freebsd.org> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> Cc: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Subject: Re: new GEOM feature - geom_vol_msdosfs Message-ID: <20040506010851.GD10016@spiff.melthusia.org> In-Reply-To: <55894.1083575066@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <20040503175810.62d3f0fb.nork@FreeBSD.org> <55894.1083575066@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--oJ71EGRlYNjSvfq7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 11:04:26AM +0200, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <20040503175810.62d3f0fb.nork@FreeBSD.org>, Norikatsu Shigemur= a writ > es: > > I made a geom_vol_msdosfs GEOM module. It provides a feature > > like geom_vol_ffs.=20 >=20 > I think this is a great idea! >=20 > I wonder if it would be smarter to collect all these in one geom > class rather than have one for each volume label metadata format, > having it in one GEOM class would simplify name-collision handling. >=20 > On the other hand, name collisions are already passively neutered > in DEVFS, so if we can live with "Don't do that then" handling of > it, then there is no reason to not have them as different GEOM > classes, which certainly makes for simpler and cleaner code. I would prefer the separate code. Esp when it comes to looking at things like CD9660. I took a passing interest to see what it would take to make that happen and I wanted to claw my eyes out. -gordon --oJ71EGRlYNjSvfq7 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFAmZAjRu2t9DV9ZfsRAkFJAJ96nxxXAqB1WW/4SxwEZWS6qAutQQCgmBtM u9Zkso3E01HbuidMQaXM+M4= =VQvK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --oJ71EGRlYNjSvfq7--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040506010851.GD10016>