From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [patch 1/2] VFS: new fgetattr() file operation Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 14:27:25 +0100 Message-ID: <20070924132725.GA20116@infradead.org> References: <20070924123640.GA17409@infradead.org> <20070924125948.GM10625@parisc-linux.org> <20070924131047.GA19017@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: hch@infradead.org, matthew@wil.cx, trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no, adilger@clusterfs.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org To: Miklos Szeredi Return-path: Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:43520 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753899AbXIXN1a (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Sep 2007 09:27:30 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 03:18:10PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > Or not support such a broken protocol at all. > > Wonder what people would say if we removed support for NFSv[23]. > > Just because a protocol does not support "perfect" UNIX semantics, it > doesn't mean it's broken. By that standard almost all network > filesystem protocols are severely broken. Well, they are broken by these and other standards. At least nfs and cifs maintainers do the workarounds for this brokeness where they belong.