Mail Archives: opendos/1997/05/02/02:22:51
> From jamesl AT mail DOT albany DOT net Fri May 2 18:03:28 1997
>> ...allow (say) a Macintosh file system to be mounted in one
> > place in the tree, an hpfs one in another..
> Wouldn't it be possible to use a single fs that has the majority of
> the necessary capabilities, such as ext2, for example, and allow the
> OS to handle translations to/from? (for the hard disk, that is)
Well:
1. Sometimes you get filesystems from a variety of sources (remote
mounts, removeable media, partitons on a system that boots a different
O/S at times).
2. It is sometimes good to have a different type of filesystem for
different jobs, e.g. storing long-term infrequently-used data.
3. The important need is to have attributes added as they are
appropriate (anybody seen what happens when you use OS/2 on a FAT
partition - the extended attributes file is huge!). If you can extend
the attributes - just of the systems that want them, and preferrably
just on files that need them - then it might be okay having a single
filesystem type in many situations.
The point I was trying to make there was that if you can have all these
attributes, what happens when they are supplied by different systems
(or over different networks that fail to pass some attributes), and you
have to mesh them together somehow?
P.S. I *do* like ext2fs, and I would like to see something better and
leaner that does just about everything an average DOS user needs so they
don't need others other than because they have to mount existing systems.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Aitchison, Physics & Astronomy \_ Phone : +64 3 3642-947 a.h. 3371-225
University of Canterbury, </ Fax : +64 3 3642-469 or 3642-999
Christchurch, New Zealand. /) E-mail: phys169 AT csc DOT canterbury DOT ac DOT nz
#include <disclaimer.std> (/'
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Raw text -