Re: file forks vs. xattr (was: xattr names for unprivileged stacking?)

Matthew Wilcox
2020-08-27T14:14:26Z

On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 03:48:57PM +0200, Christian Schoenebeck wrote:
> On Donnerstag, 27. August 2020 14:25:55 CEST Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 02:02:42PM +0200, Christian Schoenebeck wrote:
> > > What I could imagine as delimiter instead; slash-caret:
> > > /var/foo.pdf/^/forkname
> >
> > Any ascii character is going to be used in some actual customer workload.
>
> Not exactly. "/foo/^/bar" is already a valid path today. So every Linux system
> (incl. all libs/apps) must be capable to deal with that path already, so it
> would not introduce a tokenization problem.

That's exactly the point. I can guarantee you that some customer is
already using a file named exactly '^'.

> > I suggest we use a unicode character instead.
> >
> > /var/foo.pdf/💩/badidea
>
> Like I mentioned before, if you'd pick a unicode character (or binary), then
> each shell will map their own ASCII-sequence on top of that. Because shell
> users want ASCII. Which would defeat the primary purpose: a unified path
> resolution.

You misunderstood. This was my way of telling you that your idea is shit.