On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 12:38:53PM -0800, Ethan Benson wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 05:50:47AM -0400, TJ Easter wrote:
> > Anyone know if there are plans to impliment the immutable/append-only
> > options?
>
> a couple monthes ago Steve said it looked like it would be pretty easy
> to do, and without breaking backward compatibilty (since older
> implementations would simply ignore the bits). he just doesn't really
> have time, someone with a little experience in the XFS code could
> probably do it though.
>
> immutable, append-only, and the S (sync) bits would be the useful ones.
'D' for directories is quite useful too, because some mail servers
assume that everybody has synchronous rename() like traditional BSD FFS.
'd' (don't dump) should be also simple and useful.
and of course 'u' if it was implemented (probably a bit more work)
would clear a major FAQ item on this list.
-Andi
|