On Mon, 2007-09-03 at 12:51 +0200, Mildred wrote: > Hi, > > > Le Mon 03/09/2007 à 10:23 Alexander Larsson à écrit: > > On Sun, 2007-09-02 at 12:20 +0200, Mildred wrote: > > > Bundles are directories that contains others files. And these > > > directories (called bundles) are to be handled differently by files > > > managers than usual directories, more like files. > > > > This is a bad idea due to the following: > > > > A bundle can be detected by the presence of the file named > > types.bundle in a directory. The file being a text-file (lines > > being separated by ASCII character 10, LF) whose first lines > > begins with the ASCII character 1 and whose second line begins > > by BT, followed by a tabulator, by the string inode/bundle and > > the line feed. > > > > This means that to detect the type of a directory one must do a stat > > inside it, which can be very costly when there are many directories. > > For instance, gnome has disabled cheching for ".directory" desktop > > files in directories for this reasons (except in a few specific > > locations). > > > > (Also, something like glick is more likely to work everywhere since it > > requires no special handling in the file-manager.) > > I don't think it is a bad idea just because of that. Mac OS X has it and > I think it is a great idea because files are still accessible and there > is no overhead for unpacking files. And if we want to change a file in > the bundle, it is easier.
MacOS has kernel support for this (a flag in the filesystem for bundles). _______________________________________________ xdg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
