Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 04:00:37 +0200 (SAT) From: Robert Nordier <rnordier@iafrica.com> To: terry@lambert.org (Terry Lambert) Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: bit 7 in filenames Message-ID: <199606100200.EAA00468@eac.iafrica.com> In-Reply-To: <199606092329.QAA05192@phaeton.artisoft.com> from "Terry Lambert" at Jun 9, 96 04:29:20 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry Lambert wrote: > > > I'd certainly appreciate all the information you can supply, if you > > don't mind taking the trouble. I've tested a lot of Linux, Mach, > > NetBSD, and GNU DOS FS-related code in the last few months, and what is > > particularly evident is a lack of rigorous attention to detail. Besides > > that, even in the generalities, I'm such I could learn a lot from your > > experience. > > Stuff directly related to the undocumented interactions of IFS is > the intellectual property of my employer. So if it's something > that would help you build a Windows95 or WindowsNT FS, I can't > tell you. 8-(. > > The lower level BSD FS interface stuff, the lookup interface stuff, > and what is or isn't a legal DOS name, I can give you data on. > > The algorithm for name generation has been disclosed elsewhere, so > I don't feel bad about that. > > Obviously, since I've been hacking the BSD FS interface since the > late 80's, I can give you any data there as well. 8-). > > > > > The conversion to parsed-path stuctures greatly aids in use of > > > Unicode and DOS code-page interoperability... you will need to > > > incorporate a number of patches if you expect to be able to > > > support two name binding, lookup, or Unicode storage (We have a > > > UFS where we have made these modifications). > > > > Yes, this is an area in the new vfatfs implementation that still needs > > work. > > Yeah, this falls into the BSD FS interface area. Let me know what > you need on that. The big issue of Unicode vs. non-Unicode names > coexisting hinges on having the caller clean up the path structures > that it sends down to the FS instead of expecting the FS to do it > for you. I can send you the patches (or you can pull them off of > freefall -- I submitted themabout a year ago). Let me know when > you get to this. Thanks, Terry. In the short term, I'm going to be dropping the vfatfs work in favor of quick-fixing some problems in the msdosfs code. But beyond that, and when client work allows, I want to look at resolving the few remaining vfatfs design issues. I'm pretty sure the name generation algorithm is actually discussed somewhere among the MSDN stuff, though I may have seen the info elsewhere. Anyway, getting at VFAT details isn't a problem; so it would probably reduce potential non-disclosure concerns not to rely on you for those. Where advice is most likely to be useful (as in most needed) is the area of interaction with/changes to the BSD FS interface, and possibly also on some purely general (vaguely religious) principles of FS implementation (ie. choosing between alternative approaches). On that basis, I'll work towards wanting some advice in a few weeks. :) -- Robert Nordier
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199606100200.EAA00468>