[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#10349: tail: fix --follow on FhGFS remote file systems
From: |
Jim Meyering |
Subject: |
bug#10349: tail: fix --follow on FhGFS remote file systems |
Date: |
Fri, 23 Dec 2011 13:08:30 +0100 |
Pádraig Brady wrote:
> On 12/22/2011 11:48 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> On 12/22/2011 09:50 PM, Alan Curry wrote:
>>> Bob Proulx writes:
>>>>
>>>> Jim Meyering wrote:
>>>>> Are there so many new remote file systems coming into use now?
>>>>> That are not listed in /usr/include/linux/magic.h?
>>>>
>>>> The past can always be enumerated. The future is always changing. It
>>>> isn't possible to have a complete list of future items. It is only
>>>> possible to have a complete list of past items. The future is not yet
>>>> written.
>>>
>>> Between past and future is the present, i.e. the currently running kernel.
>>> Shouldn't it return an error when you use an interface that isn't
>>> implemented
>>> by the underlying filesystem? Why doesn't this happen?
>>
>> That's a fair point.
>>
>> Eric shouldn't some/all remote file systems in the kernel
>> return ENOTSUP for inotify operations?
>
> Oh right, as Sven points out,
> a notification _is_ sent for local processes modifying a remote file.
> I guess we'd need a IN_REMOTE flag (send remote events too), which
> remote file systems would return ENOTSUP if they don't support that.
> That's getting a bit awkward though.
I'm thinking of recording[*] which file systems are local and which
are remote. Then we can make tail -f warn when one or more of
its file arguments resides on a remote file system. We may finally
have to add and document --disable-inotify.
Jim
[*] It's easy to record local/remote in a table from which a switch stmt
or gperf table is derived, just as is currently done for FS magic numbers.
- bug#10349: tail: fix --follow on FhGFS remote file systems, Sven Breuner, 2011/12/21
- bug#10349: tail: fix --follow on FhGFS remote file systems, Jim Meyering, 2011/12/22
- bug#10349: tail: fix --follow on FhGFS remote file systems, Sven Breuner, 2011/12/22
- bug#10349: tail: fix --follow on FhGFS remote file systems, Bob Proulx, 2011/12/22
- bug#10349: tail: fix --follow on FhGFS remote file systems, Alan Curry, 2011/12/22
- bug#10349: tail: fix --follow on FhGFS remote file systems, Pádraig Brady, 2011/12/22
- bug#10349: tail: fix --follow on FhGFS remote file systems, Pádraig Brady, 2011/12/22
- bug#10349: tail: fix --follow on FhGFS remote file systems,
Jim Meyering <=
- bug#10349: tail: fix --follow on FhGFS remote file systems, Pádraig Brady, 2011/12/23
- bug#10349: tail: fix --follow on FhGFS remote file systems, Jim Meyering, 2011/12/23
- bug#10349: tail: fix --follow on FhGFS remote file systems, Pádraig Brady, 2011/12/23
- bug#10349: tail: fix --follow on FhGFS remote file systems, Jim Meyering, 2011/12/23
- bug#10349: tail: fix --follow on FhGFS remote file systems, Pádraig Brady, 2011/12/23
- bug#10349: tail: fix --follow on FhGFS remote file systems, Jim Meyering, 2011/12/23
- bug#10349: tail: fix --follow on FhGFS remote file systems, Sven Breuner, 2011/12/23
- bug#10349: tail: fix --follow on FhGFS remote file systems, Sven Breuner, 2011/12/22