From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-Id: <497675D4-2435-4B80-93F5-49AAAA119C14@gmail.com> From: Gorka Guardiola To: "fernanbolando@mailc.net" , Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> In-Reply-To: <1d5d51400910030226j4dc8d8b5x1cfaee68a45fc1e2@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPhone Mail 7C144) Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 13:34:10 +0200 References: <1d5d51400910021329of1eeae4la53a25ed2940919b@mail.gmail.com> <1d5d51400910030226j4dc8d8b5x1cfaee68a45fc1e2@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [9fans] clarification on man 9p Topicbox-Message-UUID: 7ccb9b48-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 There is a version that is. Its source is with the library. - Curiosity sKilled the cat G. On Oct 3, 2009, at 11:26 AM, Fernan Bolando wrote: > 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. You can look at the named examples to see >> the alternative. My 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 rdbfs. > > regards > fernan > > > -- > http://www.fernski.com >