From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 24 07:18:17 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C02AE1065679; Thu, 24 Apr 2008 07:18:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from avg@icyb.net.ua) Received: from hosted.kievnet.com (hosted.kievnet.com [193.138.144.10]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99B848FC22; Thu, 24 Apr 2008 07:18:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from avg@icyb.net.ua) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=edge.pp.kiev.ua) by hosted.kievnet.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1Jovii-000LAX-4p; Thu, 24 Apr 2008 10:18:16 +0300 Message-ID: <48103437.6040001@icyb.net.ua> Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 10:18:15 +0300 From: Andriy Gapon User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080320) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Scott Long References: <480E440D.2030907@icyb.net.ua> <48101269.20702@samsco.org> In-Reply-To: <48101269.20702@samsco.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, Pav Lucistnik Subject: Re: latest udf patch X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 07:18:17 -0000 on 24/04/2008 07:54 Scott Long said the following: > Andriy Gapon wrote: >> Maybe you will be interested in my latest UDF patch that adds very >> simplistic support for UDF 2.XX+ (on top of all the previous >> fixes/enhancements). >> >> I posted it as a followup to the following PR: >> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/120989 >> >> The patch is also available at the following URL: >> http://www.icyb.net.ua/~avg/udf.diff.gz >> >> It is against RELENG_7. >> I plan to update it at the above URL if I have anything new. >> > > Is this ready for committing to CVS? If so I'll take care of it. Scott, thank you. I am not sure how much testing this patch has seen. I have feedback only from Pav. The patch definitely "works for me" and for a long time (only extended file entry support is a recent addition). I think there might be some style(9) violations in the patch. In couple of places I definitely went over 80-column limit for aesthetic reasons (and because I think 80 is too small to be required in modern times). I would definitely appreciate somebody reviewing the patch for style(9) and general coding practices. More testing (with feedback!) is always welcome for sure. -- Andriy Gapon