From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S268694AbUHZLWW (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Aug 2004 07:22:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S268690AbUHZLUq (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Aug 2004 07:20:46 -0400 Received: from c002781a.fit.bostream.se ([217.215.235.8]:64397 "EHLO mail.tnonline.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S268775AbUHZLOy (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Aug 2004 07:14:54 -0400 Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 13:17:30 +0200 From: Spam Reply-To: Spam X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <507956415.20040826131730@tnonline.net> To: Christoph Hellwig CC: Jamie Lokier , Hans Reiser , Linus Torvalds , Mikulas Patocka , , , Alexander Lyamin aka FLX , ReiserFS List Subject: Re: silent semantic changes with reiser4 In-Reply-To: <20040826105914.GA30795@lst.de> References: <20040824202521.GA26705@lst.de> <412CEE38.1080707@namesys.com> <20040825200859.GA16345@lst.de> <412DA11B.2070303@namesys.com> <20040826105330.GB30449@mail.shareable.org> <20040826105914.GA30795@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 11:53:30AM +0100, Jamie Lokier wrote: >> Hans Reiser wrote: >> > being able to cat dirname/pseudos/cat and get a >> > concatenation of all of the files is nice, and being able to cat >> > dirname/pseudos/tar and get an archive of the directory is nice >> >> Yes. Being able to cd into filename.tar.gz and filename.iso is also >> nice, but all of these features should be supported by the VFS >> generically, not in any specific filesystem, and there should be a >> hook to invoke the various fun filesystem-independent handlers by name. > It doesn't belong into the kernel at all. If at all it belongs into a > userspace filesystems, but even in that case the magic detection of > which one to use is kinda hard. You absoutely don't want to hardcode > file formats in the kernel. Do you mean user-level file system as a VFS handled by user applications, or a intermediate file system layer between any application and the real file system? The latter would be good enough as it would still be transparent to the applications. ~S