From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Subject: Re: [PATCH] Added CONFIG_VFAT_FS_DUALNAMES option Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 12:51:41 -0700 Message-ID: References: <19013.8005.541836.436991@samba.org> <19014.54044.484370.187018@samba.org> <19015.482.794111.612472@samba.org> <87ab3sx4ch.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: john.lanza@linux.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, OGAWA Hirofumi , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Kleikamp , Steve French , Mingming Cao , Paul McKenney To: tridge@samba.org Return-path: Received: from out01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.231]:47317 "EHLO out01.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751714AbZF1Tvp (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Jun 2009 15:51:45 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87ab3sx4ch.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp> (OGAWA Hirofumi's message of "Sun\, 28 Jun 2009 15\:25\:02 +0900") Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: OGAWA Hirofumi writes: > tridge@samba.org writes: > >> > Given what you have said our interpretation of vfat has a bug, >> > and that small change is a candidate for -stable. If it could >> > be it's own patch. >> >> good point. >> >> Hirofumi-san, would you support putting the last_u change into stable? > > If you want, I have no problem to do. However, I'm not thinking that > part is a bug. And -stable rule is also "a real bug that bothers > people", but there is even a no bug reporter which tell actual problem. Tridge. Is there any reason to believe that Microsoft will continue to treat Longfilenames without short filenames as valid in vfat? If this turns into a contest of who can do the silliest things in their vfat code microsoft could easily introduce a stricter directory parser and cause all kinds of grief. It wouldn't even surprise me if you haven't seen such shenanigans while working on samba. Eric