Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 29 Jun 1999 19:47:06 -0400 (EDT) | From | Stephen Frost <> | Subject | Re: If we cannot trim subject lines... |
| |
On Tue, 29 Jun 1999, Mark-Andre Hopf wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jun 1999, Jamie Lokier wrote: > > > Richard Gooch wrote: > > > Secondly, we haven't seen a convincining argument as to why putting a > > > FS into a file provides a significant benefit. > > > > A fair point, though I haven't seen a convincing argument why a plain > > old directory isn't adequate for holding a compound document. > > (a) Because it prevents the normal user from messing around with the > internal of the `directory' and with it preventing the application > programmer from adding tons of code to detect and workaround unexpected > changes.
That actually sounds like a most-excellent feature to me. :) Why is this needed to be done in kernel-space, anyhow? Sounds very user-level. Perhaps a well-written library would suffice...
> (b) The normal user expects a `bunch of data' in a single file, not in a > directory.
I would disagree w/ that, actually. Many think that now because of Micro$oft, that doesn't mean it's the most optimal way of doing it. Besides, there are tarballs, and you could just have your code able to understand a tarball.
> (c) The content of the `directory' isn't of interest to the user but to some > applications.
This doesn't seem very likely, at least not to me... :)
Stephen
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |