Re: [RFC]swapfso and ioctl function for filesystems

2008-09-05 Thread Robert Millan
On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 11:27:20PM +0200, phcoder wrote: Could this be made more transparent? For example, with a variable. Here perhaps it could be. But in other usage cases like putting the dos boot files into the right place or doing swapfso it couldn't. We intentionally don't

Re: [RFC]swapfso and ioctl function for filesystems

2008-09-04 Thread Robert Millan
On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 02:25:51PM +0200, phcoder wrote: Robert Millan wrote: On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 11:42:44AM +0200, phcoder wrote: Hello, all. For some FS sometimes additional functions are needed. It could be some type of control (e.g. in ZFS manage zpools) or preparation for OS

Re: [RFC]swapfso and ioctl function for filesystems

2008-09-04 Thread phcoder
Robert Millan wrote: On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 02:25:51PM +0200, phcoder wrote: Robert Millan wrote: On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 11:42:44AM +0200, phcoder wrote: Hello, all. For some FS sometimes additional functions are needed. It could be some type of control (e.g. in ZFS manage zpools) or

[RFC]swapfso and ioctl function for filesystems

2008-09-03 Thread phcoder
Hello, all. For some FS sometimes additional functions are needed. It could be some type of control (e.g. in ZFS manage zpools) or preparation for OS booting (e.g. in FAT put IO.SYS and MSDOS.SYS at the begining of the root directory). While theese functions are quite specific to FS sometimes are