From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <8ccc8ba40708200753i5c096f98pd3ea009b497261c0@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 16:53:42 +0200
From: "Francisco J Ballesteros" <nemo@lsub.org>
To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] everything is a directory
In-Reply-To: <46C9A3E8.5A6BE67D@null.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <46C4E86C.CD73F5D@null.net>
	<13426df10708170600u40bd2dcat14f02aa7c192fb0e@mail.gmail.com>
	<46C61B21.67B15E89@null.net> <46C9A3E8.5A6BE67D@null.net>
Topicbox-Message-UUID: ad272350-ead2-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

But why don't just keep a foo.attr side by side with the file then?
Should you need that, I mean.

On 8/20/07, Douglas A. Gwyn <DAGwyn@null.net> wrote:
> I was thinking more about the subject, and extended attributes.
> Here is an alternative proposal to implement extended attributes:
>
> (1) Everything stays the same as it is (Plan 9 or old-Unix)
> except:
> (2) An attempt to read(2) or write(2) a directory will succeed
> if and only if there is a .data entry, in which case it will
> access contents of the .data object.
>
> None of the existing tools need to be changed.
>
> To add attributes (all done in user space):
> (a) Move the current file (terminal node) to a temp name.
> (b) Make a directory in its place, with the original name.
> (c) Move the temp name to original_name/.data .
> (d) Create a file (subdirectory?) .attributes .
> (e) Populate the .attributes .
>