From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 14:49:37 -0500 From: "Eric Van Hensbergen" To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] QTCTL? In-Reply-To: <652631bab418d2f53b213f058ee833e6@quanstro.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <8ccc8ba40710311140t5e5f2a35o898ecaa43fea29a4@mail.gmail.com> <652631bab418d2f53b213f058ee833e6@quanstro.net> Topicbox-Message-UUID: e1e5e64e-ead2-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On 10/31/07, erik quanstrom wrote: > > Why don=B4t add a QTCTL bit to Qid.type? > > It would mean "this file does not behave like a regular file, do not ca= che and > > handle with care). > > why are the current namespace conventions insufficient? > /mnt, /net, and /dev hold most, if not all, of the special files. > The dynamic nature of namespace works against such conventions. Besides it would be nice to have a mechanism that could work in other systems that use 9p. File servers should be able to convey whether a file is cache-able or not. -eric