Re: [PATCH 0/3] Add O_DENY* flags to fcntl and cifs
From: Jeremy Allison <hidden>
Date: 2012-12-06 21:33:29
Also in:
linux-cifs, linux-fsdevel, lkml
Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)
- 2012-12-17 · Re: [PATCH 0/3] Add O_DENY* flags to fcntl and cifs · J. Bruce Fields <hidden>
- 2012-12-14 · Re: [PATCH 0/3] Add O_DENY* flags to fcntl and cifs · Steve French <hidden>
- 2012-12-14 · Re: [PATCH 0/3] Add O_DENY* flags to fcntl and cifs · Alan Cox <hidden>
- 2012-12-14 · Re: [PATCH 0/3] Add O_DENY* flags to fcntl and cifs · Pavel Shilovsky <hidden>
- 2012-12-12 · Re: [PATCH 0/3] Add O_DENY* flags to fcntl and cifs · David Laight <hidden>
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 04:31:33PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 11:57:52AM -0800, Jeremy Allison wrote:quoted
And this is where things get really ugly of course :-). For the CIFSFS client they're expecting to be able to just ship them to a Windows server, where they'll get the (insane) Windows semantics. These semantics are not what would be wanted on a local filesystem.I'm confused; why would a userspace application need to be able to request this behavior?
This isn't my proposal Ted, I'm just commenting on it :-). Jeremy.