On Tue, Apr 30, 2002 at 09:53:02AM -0500, Steve Lord wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-04-30 at 09:26, Ethan Benson wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 30, 2002 at 08:51:14AM -0500, Steve Lord wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2002-04-29 at 15:16, Austin Gonyou wrote:
> > > > I know you guys are gonna shoot the hell outta me for this, but what can
> > > > one do to set files immutable, as in chattr -i, with XFS? TIA
> > > > --
> > >
> > > Sorry, no can do, XFS does not have an immutable inode concept. All
> > > you can do is close the permissions down on the inode.
> >
> > which doesn't work since 1) root is immune to permissions and 2) there
> > is no append-only permission bit.
> >
> > as i understand it there are some unused bits left in the XFS inode,
> > so adding these is possible (and if current implementations set these
> > to zero on create and ignore and leave alone on modify the change
> > would be fully backward compatible (other then older implementations
> > ignoring them)).
>
> I said you cannot do it, I was referring to the existing code, yes it
> is possible, but currently only ext2 and ext3 support this, and chattr
> is an ext2 utility, not a generic linux filesystem utility.
>
> Adding it also introduces an on disk incompatibility between Irix and
> Linux, and probably we could not take the code back to Irix, given its
> origin. So we would need to version the superblock - we would need that
> anyway for backward compatibility. All in all it gets to be a larger
> project than you might think. My problem now is definitely not lack of
> work ;-)
why do you necessarily have to version the superblock? do current
implemementations blow up if the existing reserved inodes are
anything but zero?
--
Ethan Benson
http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/
pgpxw5ll9m6Pg.pgp
Description: PGP signature
|