>>> The whole vfat design is "disaster waiting to happen" :-/
>> The original design is, yes, but then, that came from Microsoft,
>> so what can one expect. The Linux implementation isn't too bad
>> in a lot of ways, but there are a few tweaks that are needed to
>> polish it up to the professional standards that Linus generally
>> requires.
> You can not workaround general flaws in design.
Certain Intel Pentium class chips had a "general flaw" in their
design that gained the nickname "F00F Bug", but Linux manages to
quite successfully work round the said problem. I can see no good
reason why the same shouldn't be true of the flaws in the VFAT
design.
> Linux has mostly the same problem with vfat as Win9X/WinNT
> itself.
There's no need to introduce additional flaws to the design. I
see the hidden filenames as an additional flaw that needs fixing,
although I agree with Alexander that the case of directories with
dual names needs careful consideration.
Best wishes from Riley.
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| There is something frustrating about the quality and speed of Linux |
| development, ie., the quality is too high and the speed is too high, |
| in other words, I can implement this XXXX feature, but I bet someone |
| else has already done so and is just about to release their patch. |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
* ftp://ftp.MemAlpha.cx/pub/rhw/Linux
* http://www.MemAlpha.cx/kernel.versions.html
-
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/