But win2k doesn't access the filesystem directly, it accesses it through
samba. At no stage does win2k use the kernel directly.
So anything that could go into the kernel could equally well go in samba
as far as the networked win2k boxes are concerned.
Ok you may lose performance, and it may be a little harder to write, and
it may make samba shares "off limits" to normal unix users.
But you do not need fork support from the kernel. Lack of kernel support
for forks/streams isn't the real problem.
In this case I suspect the real problem is that JA wants to let standard
unix tools muck directly with win2k shares without losing meta info. I'm
not opposed to meta info (it will certainly make it easier for GNOME and
KDE to do various things) but I abhor the idea of adding it just because
it makes it easier to support win2k shares. You can support win2k shares
without going to drastic kernel hacking measures.
> > This should be done in userspace. Editing /etc/passwd is certainly not
> > performance critical so podfuk is just the right
> > answer. (http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/podfuk/podfuk.html).
>
> I hope you realize that "podfuk" will not be very successful in the US.
> The sound of "podfuk" brings to mind sexual activity with vegatables.
> Businesses in the US are very concerned about sexual harassment lawsuits.
The word podfuk comes from an American video game (Star Control 2) which
had a PG rating nearly 10 years ago. It obviously isn't a problem.
--
Nathan Hand - Chirp Web Design - http://www.chirp.com.au/ - $e^{i\pi}+1 = 0$
Phone: +61 2 6230 1871 Fax: +61 2 6230 4455 E-mail: nathanh@chirp.com.au
-
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/