Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 13:26:38 -0400 From: "Jeroen C. van Gelderen" <jeroen@vangelderen.org> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> Cc: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: inheriting the "nodump" flag ? Message-ID: <3A33BCCE.844B35B4@vangelderen.org> References: <97668.976451080@critter>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > In message <3A336D68.2B454829@elischer.org>, Julian Elischer writes: > > >> I would like to propose that directories and files inherit the > >> nodump flag if it is set on the directory they are created in. > >> > >> Comments ? protests ? > > > >I thought that it was supposed to stop the tree walker from walking > >down through the tree beyond that point if it is on a directory.. > > > >in other words, if you set it on a directory it is supposed to > >'prune' the entire tree.. sounds like a problem with the > >tree walker rather than the kernel. > > Well, dump's tree walker is rather peculiar, so I don't blame > anyone for the way it is implemented currently. This answer does not address the real point Julian is trying to make. Trying to fix a buggy dump implementation by patching the kernel is the wrong approach. It doesn't matter how peculiar the tree walker is, if it's buggy the fixing needs to be done there. It looks like NetBSD have already addressed the problem a year ago: http://lists.openresources.com/NetBSD/tech-kern/msg00453.html for the beginning of a thread discussing the problem. This was the first hit Google returned for "nodump flag". Basic research is cheap these days... A look at the NetBSD PR in question (6705) reveals: http://www.NetBSD.org/cgi-bin/query-pr-single.pl?number=6705 [...] >Release-Note: >Audit-Trail: State-Changed-From-To: open->closed State-Changed-By: bouyer State-Changed-When: Tue Mar 9 09:32:08 PST 1999 State-Changed-Why: Functionality added [to dump I presume], but differently. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ It seems that fixing dump is the correct approach. Changing the semantics to nodump almost certainly is not as Julian pointed out in his other mail (<3A336EA3.9F1FE318@elischer.org>). I can now even add another reason why changing the kernel isn't such a good plan: inter-BSD compatibility. Cheers, Jeroen -- Jeroen C. van Gelderen o _ _ _ jeroen@vangelderen.org _o /\_ _ \\o (_)\__/o (_) _< \_ _>(_) (_)/<_ \_| \ _|/' \/ (_)>(_) (_) (_) (_) (_)' _\o_ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3A33BCCE.844B35B4>