Re: silent semantic changes with reiser4

[Spam]

> On Fri, 27 Aug 2004, Hans Reiser wrote:

>> Why are you guys even considering going to any pain at all to distort
>> semantics for the sake of backup?  tar is easy, we'll fix it and send in
>> a patch. 

> It's not as easy as you make it out, and not just because
> there are a few dozen backup programs that need fixing.

> The problem is more fundamental than that.  Some of the
> file streams proposed need to be backed up, while others
> are alternative presentations of the file, which should
> not be backed up.

  No, not really. This is a user decision and should be options in the
  backup  software.  I don't think it is up to the kernel, filesystem,
  or  the  OS  in  general to decide what information the user want to
  retain or not.

> Currently I see no way to distinguish between the stuff
> that should be backed up and the stuff that shouldn't.

> That problem needs to be resolved before we can even start
> thinking about fixing archivers...

  The  archivers  should,  as  I  said,  allow  the user to choose. It
  shouldn't be automatic. Default, should IMO be to store everything.

  ~S


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/