Re: [OpenAFS-devel] dcerpc.net - freedce

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

> I don't think that using a particular RPC is cool or useful unless you
> get some benefit from it.
 
that seems to be the general consensus.

given that CDS didn't exactly take off in a particularly big
way, it's not really justifiable.

hmmm.

> But is merging DFS and AFS a goal worth pursuing? 

consensus seems to be... nope! :)

>  It seems that
> grabbing file ACLs (if you can find a way to make them work better
> than DFS--I considered its ACL system unacceptable when I used it),
> byte range locking and a few other things would be easier than doing a
> merge of the code.

byte range locking.

did you know that samba emulates byte range locking on top
of posix locks?

what they do is:

1) always make the posix locks r/w (_just_ in case...)

2) maintain a dual list of the 'emulated' byte range locks
and the 'real' posix locks.

the reason for having the posix locks always r/w is
because the byte range locks can potentially a) overlap
(yuck!) b) be read _or_ write.  and posix locks _cannot_
overlap.

anyway, thought that might be useful, if by byte range
locks you mean 'NT-style-semantics', which implies
basically that the range locks are allowed to overlap.

all best,

luke
_______________________________________________
OpenAFS-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel