From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <621e6fad9ef35e443baa7ad1d6e95b9f@chula.quanstro.net>
References: <af3d20ce-0b0c-45c5-b657-6ac5910ad865@googlegroups.com>
	<CAOw7k5h1PPpjqP+KJWC+zbdOZ2OPhWe=aG-SEdV9cfSC+5pPrQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOw7k5hCyZAZxZQaeLZAMh8R62qQPpcWC_aWf2Og4HPrU=h6OA@mail.gmail.com>
	<aa13663635c2e804960036d64919dd7e@brasstown.quanstro.net>
	<CAOw7k5jOsFnnrcUvqGwjE0oMAKE9WCawaHgyqARP9c4pBNJkRA@mail.gmail.com>
	<621e6fad9ef35e443baa7ad1d6e95b9f@chula.quanstro.net>
Date: Wed,  5 Dec 2012 13:58:57 +0000
Message-ID: <CAOw7k5j2w3L1Zx+T8JcyU-F2aob7KGYwY3VdDm0UE7oXbGvsoA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Charles Forsyth <charles.forsyth@gmail.com>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [9fans] QTEXCL/DMEXCL redundancy
Topicbox-Message-UUID: f1243b9c-ead7-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

I was explaining why the top bits of the mode were in qid.type
(replacing the older single bit directory flag at the top of
qid.path).
I wasn't saying which of those were important to which applications.
You could, of course, not bother to put QTEXCL in that set
specially, and then have special cases to cope with that. On the whole
(a) QTEXCL might also be useful even if cfs doesn't use it;
(b) it's easier to write and explain qid.type == (mode>>24) than to
enumerate special cases.


On 5 December 2012 13:45, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:
> On Wed Dec  5 08:07:03 EST 2012, charles.forsyth@gmail.com wrote:
>> cfs, fscfs
>
> ; cd /sys/src/cmd/cfs
> ; g EXCL
> ; 9diff *
> post...
> ;
>
> - erik
>