>> Basically what libraries, i need to use -- i think libdiskfs will be >> needed! > > No, you should use libnetfs, because the nodes in the directory > hierarchy provided by tarfs are "virtual" - in a way.
I disagree; libdiskfs should be used. >From what I understand, libdiskfs is designed for the case where the translator `owns' the backing store, e.g. ext2fs makes the assumption that no one will modify the backing store while it is using it -- if someone does, the protocol has been violated. The same can be said for tmpfs et al. The libnetfs library, on the other hand, is designed for situations where the implementation does not have complete control of the backing store. For instance, an nfs client must take into account that fact that others can change the files on the back store (in this case, the server) and that the copy it has might be out of date. A proc-like file system should also use libnetfs: the process data (pids et al) is constantly changing. In both of these cases, libnetfs makes the right assumptions. I think that the tarfs model is more similar to ext2fs than to nfs. > - it could then for example build a complete hierarchy of nodes, which > corresponds to the content of the tar archive Embracing the Unix philosophy, the implementation should be as lazy as possible, i.e. it should wait until the very last minute to actually fill in the data structures rather than doing all of the work on startup. _______________________________________________ Bug-hurd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
