From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1d5d51400910021329of1eeae4la53a25ed2940919b@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 17:26:16 +0800 Message-ID: <1d5d51400910030226j4dc8d8b5x1cfaee68a45fc1e2@mail.gmail.com> From: Fernan Bolando To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [9fans] clarification on man 9p Topicbox-Message-UUID: 7cbda902-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 8:29 AM, Russ Cox wrote: >> "In general, the File interface is appropriate for maintaining >> arbitrary file trees (as in ramfs). The File interface is best avoided >> when the tree structure is easily generated as necessary; this is true >> when the tree is highly structured (as in cdfs and nntpfs) or is >> maintained elsewhere." >> >> Is this referring to avoiding the usage of createfile and friends in >> 9pfile.h for highly structured trees? > > Yes. =A0You can look at the named examples to see > the alternative. =A0My experience has been, well, what > it says in the man page: the File interface was an > interesting idea but is rarely useful. > I understand, what confused me was that ramfs is not using File/createfile. So even though ramfs could have taken advantage of the createfile tools it didn't. why? The only fileserver that I found that was actually using createfile is rdbf= s. regards fernan --=20 http://www.fernski.com