> > You are dealing with inherently sucking filesystem. Sorry. There
> >is *no* out-of-directory metadata and thus there is no persistent inodes.
>
> If you are willing to accept the still-not-ideal constraint
> that the inode number stays constant so long as only Linux (or, in any
> case, another system employing the same algorithm) performs directory
D'oh! If only Linux does it - WTFPoint of using FAT? Exercise in
masochism?
> operations on the filesystem in questions, you might implement an
> auxiliary file that holds persistent inode mappings.
... and face additional shitload of races due to the fact that we have an
extra file to modify. And additional slowdown. Great.
> The natural place to put the inode map would be on the same
> underlying FAT filesystem, but for extra brownie points you could
> perhaps arrange for it to be located on a different filesystem. To
> protect against external meddling (e.g., renaming a file with
> Ms. Windows), the persistent inode map should contain checksums of
> the VFAT filesystem's underlying directory pages.
> This is piling cruft upon cruft, but it could be made to work
> under the given constraint. It could even be yet another layered
> filesystem (PVFAT?) in the towering FAT ensemble. Future generations
> will not thank you, though.
Me? No, sir. DIY if you want. I'll pass.
-
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/