From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 25 May 2002 17:07:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 25 May 2002 17:07:38 -0400 Received: from APuteaux-101-2-1-180.abo.wanadoo.fr ([193.251.40.180]:54800 "EHLO inet6.dyn.dhs.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 25 May 2002 17:07:37 -0400 Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 23:07:35 +0200 From: Lionel Bouton To: Jeremy White Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: isofs unhide option: troubles with Wine Message-ID: <20020525230735.A18560@bouton.inet6-interne.fr> Mail-Followup-To: Jeremy White , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <1022301029.2443.28.camel@jwhiteh> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, May 24, 2002 at 11:30:29PM -0500, Jeremy White wrote: > Greetings, > > When installing Microsoft Office with Wine, we find that some > MS CDs have certain files marked as hidden on the CD. > [...] > > Unfortunately, I don't have a strong feeling for what the > 'right' solution is. I see several options: > > 1. Invert the logic of the option, make it 'hide' instead > of unhide, and so unhide is the default. > > 2. Make it possible to set this mount option from user > space (I don't like this, but it would get me around > the problem). > > 3. Make it so that isofs/dir.c still strips out hidden > files, but enable isofs/namei.c to return a hidden file that > is opened directly by name. > > I am willing to submit a patch to implement the appropriate solution. > > Comments and opinions are greatly appreciated; please copy me directly > though, as I am not subscribed. > > Thanks, > > Jeremy > With 3. Wine's FindFirstFile and FindNextFile wont't be able to report hidden files and Win32 programs could rely on that instead of using hard-coded filenames. If I'm not mistaken these functions return all files and put file flags in a struct. User apps are responsible of the hiding. One could argue that Win32 programs could rely on the file flags being reported correctly, but I find this far less probable. If one goal is to allow Wine to implement the Win32 syscalls as correctly as possible 3. is not an option IMHO. Moreover I don't like the idea of files readable but not findable by common tools, seems broken to me. 2. will lead to entries in FAQ: Q: What does the "unhide" option mean in my /etc/fstab ? A: Lengthy explanation on ISO9660, Windows FS versus Unix FS and so on... 1. will do what Linux already does for other FAT/NTFS contents, simply show the info to the users even if Windows' tools hide it by default. Personnaly I would choose 1. (I prefer short FAQs). LB.