Donnie Berkholz kirjoitti: > On 08:29 Thu 20 Dec , Ciaran McCreesh wrote: >> On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 16:38:01 -0800 >> Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Here's some other ideas for how to express EAPI. What if we: >>> >>> Used EAPI-named subdirectories instead of tagging it into the >>> filename? >> Performance hit, and otherwise equivalent to using suffixes. > > Not quite so ugly-looking to my eyes. > >>> Used (and required) filesystem extended attributes? >> Unportable, unsyncable and unmaintainable. > > Unportable to filesystems that don't support extended attributes isn't > very interesting to me, unless they're common. Out of curiosity, do you > know which ones that would be? Looking at my kernel config, ext3 and > reiser explicitly support xattrs, and I see jfs and xfs have acls and > security labels, which might be usable. Unsyncable would be a problem, > so it's a good thing rsync has USE=xattr -- do the difficulties come in > on the CVS side? Why do you say unmaintainable? >
Many users might have extended attributes support turned off in the kernel. Regards, Petteri
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
