From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Spam Subject: Re: The argument for fs assistance in handling archives Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2004 13:11:22 +0200 Message-ID: <123393726.20040902131122@tnonline.net> References: <20040826150202.GE5733@mail.shareable.org> <4136E0B6.4000705@namesys.com> <1117111836.20040902115249@tnonline.net> <200409021309.04780.oliver@neukum.org> Reply-To: Spam Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: Hans Reiser , Linus Torvalds , David Masover , Jamie Lokier , Horst von Brand , Adrian Bunk , , Christoph Hellwig , , , Alexander Lyamin aka FLX , ReiserFS List Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com To: Oliver Neukum In-Reply-To: <200409021309.04780.oliver@neukum.org> List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org > Am Donnerstag, 2. September 2004 11:52 schrieb Spam: >>   Btw, version control for ordinary files would be a great feature. I >>   think something like it is available through Windows 2000/3 server. >>   Isn't it called "Shadow Copies". It works over network shares. :) >> >>   It allows you to restore previous versions of the file even if you >>   delete or overwrite it. > There's no need to do that in kernel, unless you want to be able > to force it unto users. Exactly ;) Difference with having it in just certain applications like Gnome-VFS etc is that it would work with all applications, over SMB shares etc. This is a great advantage and benefit for many desktop users but also in a corporate environment. Even though there are backups of users documents it is a pain to restore them every time they loose the original file. Besides, the backup is never as fresh either. > Regards > Oliver