A bit of both. Coda is a lot fancier than NFS is many ways and some of that
requires for coda to be aware of any change made to the files. This also
applies to locally applied changes: any local file access need to go
through coda.
I guess you could make a `coda on anyfs' but then the local accesses would
have a special status: the consistency guarantees between local accesses
and remote accesses would be rather poor (while coda provides pretty good such
guarantees between two remote accesses).
Anyway, going back to CacheFS, obviously some people would like to have such a
thing, but obviously also, none of them needs it badly enough that she's
willing to write it... so the discussion is mostly pointless.
Stefan
-
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/