I'm far from an expert level C programmer, but I will examine the code and
see if I am able to come up with anything and submit patches.
Regards,
-tj-
On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, 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.
>
> > Regards,
> > -tje-
> >
> > On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, Ethan Benson wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 10:46:59AM +0200, Fabien Combernous wrote:
> > > > Lo,
> > > >
> > > > Actualy i'm looking for documents about journalised file system, in
> > > > order to be able to compare them self. I need accurate information if i
> > > > want to make a good study.
> > > >
> > > > Thoses informations have to permit me to get answer about table like
> > > > this :
> > > >
> > > > Features \ fs | xfs | ext3 | jfs | reiserfs |
> > > > -------------------------------------------------
> > > > chattr | ? | Y | ? | ? |
> > >
> > > if you mean immutable/append only xfs doesn't have that, but its been
> > > found it would be easy to add. reiserfs already did add it.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Ethan Benson
> > > http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/
> > >
>
> --
> Ethan Benson
> http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/
>
|