Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 10 Jul 2006 14:30:20 -0600
From:      Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org>
To:        Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc:        freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Craig Rodrigues <rodrigc@crodrigues.org>
Subject:   Re: [RFC] mount can figure out fstype automatically
Message-ID:  <44B2B8DC.8070201@samsco.org>
In-Reply-To: <20060710202219.GA29786@infradead.org>
References:  <20060708152801.GA3671@crodrigues.org> <44AFD7DF.8090002@errno.com> <20060708174606.GA29602@infradead.org> <44B2A51A.4040103@samsco.org> <20060710202219.GA29786@infradead.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2006 at 01:06:02PM -0600, Scott Long wrote:
> 
>>So in your opinion and experience, what are the pros and cons of 
>>maintaining a table of magic numbers?
> 
> 
> The feature is imensely useful.  The implementation won't win any
> points for a clean design but works very well in practice.  I think
> it's definitly better than probing in the kernel because letting a filesystem
> driver try to make sense of something that's not it's own format can
> lead to all kinds of funnies.  Linux does this (iterating all filesystem
> types in kernel) for the special case of the root filesystem where mount(8)
> is not available, and it showeds various interesting bugs at least in the
> fat driver.
> 

How does it resolve situations like with UDF vs iso9660, where both 
structures can co-exist?

Scott




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?44B2B8DC.8070201>