Simon 'corecode' Schubert
corecode at fs.ei.tum.de
Sat May 3 16:01:48 PDT 2008
Matthew Dillon wrote:
And, stupid me, when I created the dirent structure I didn't add enough
reserved fields to hold what we need, which is a full blown cookie for
each entry. We only have 40 bits worth of unused fields and we need
64 bits. I don't dare change that structure now, it would require
every single application ever written to be recompiled.
Actually this is not true. The dirent structure is variable-sized
anyways, because it is only as long as necessary to store the name.
We could simply put the cookie after the name and include the cookie
length in the namelen field, so that _DIRENT_NEXT will keep working.
Of course this is only needed for binary compatibility. I think
2.0-RELEASE would be a good opportunity to have a "break" in binary
compatibility, i.e. to bump all library versions. We could then introduce
a new syscall returning nice cookies :)
Serve - BSD +++ RENT this banner advert +++ ASCII Ribbon /"\
Work - Mac +++ space for low â¬â¬â¬ NOW!1 +++ Campaign \ /
Party Enjoy Relax | http://dragonflybsd.org Against HTML \
Dude 2c 2 the max ! http://golden-apple.biz Mail + News / \
More information about the Bugs