Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 01:18:20AM +0200, Marco Gerards wrote: > > I've included some descriptions I wrote with this mail, I've also > > written a new task for fatfs. I just called this item "Fix writing > > support", which includes many small tasks. Is it better to divide this > > task in many small tasks? (I'll wait with adding this task/tasks > > before I add this task on savannah). > > I think that each of those you listed is independent of the others, so they > should have their own task.
Ok. > I am not going to comment on priorities and difficulties, I found it hard to > judge this. I think those are best left to the person assigned to do the > task. Fill them in with whatever your judgement on this is. I will. > Another way to find tasks is to grep the source for XXX and FIXME comments. Ok. > > Fix writing support > > > > priority: 7 > > difficulty: 8 > > > > Writing support in fatfs does work a bit, but it is far from > > perfect. Before it correctly works these things should be fixed: > > If you have one task for each of these, they are differently difficult and > prioritized. Right. [...] > Another one: > > Use the information in the superblock to find out how much disk space is > used/free. Update this information. This is a bit more difficult. FAT32 has a separate block to store this information. The information is not always correct. I will write a todo item about this and about it's limitations (and how to avoid this). > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Write a utmp translator > > > > priority: 4 > > difficulty: 5 > > > > Design the utmp interfaces and write a translator. Change all programs > > that use utmp to use this translator. > > I know you got this from the official task list, but I would only want to > see it in Savannah if you can roughly describe what this translator and the > interface should do. Because the above is only going to raise more > questions about it, questions which I couldn't answer (maybe Thomas or > Roland can explain this task item). > > In general, a task item should provide enough information to get people > started. It should be clear what needs to be done in which way. If it only > says what needs to be done without saying how (and the "how" is not > obvious), then the task item is only of limited usefulness: It can serve the > people who know how as a reminder, but that's it. Ok. [...] > > priority: 5 > > difficulty: 5 > > > > Libnetfs should handle these options just like libdiskfs does. It > > should be possible to get and change these options after the server > > started using fsysopts. > > > (libdiskfs) > > Handle dead name notifications on execserver ports. > > That's not at all important right now. It's probably a somewhat obscure > robustness issue. > > > priority: 6 > > difficulty: 3 > > > > When the exec server dies it is impossibly to start a > > program. libdiskfs should handle dead name notifications to find out > > if the exec server died and alert the user. > > You are sure that this is what it is about? init already should do that. I didn't know init can restart the exec server. What I know is when the exec server dies it doesn't notice this and update the stored portname. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Support multiple users per uid > > > > priority: 5 > > difficulty: 5 > > > > It is only possible for one user per uid to log in. The uid is passed > > to the password server instead of the username. The password > > (password.defs) interfaces should be changed so it is possible to pass > > the username to the password server. > > > > The password server and libshouldbeinlibc should be changed to use the > > interfaces and usernames instead of uids internally. > > > > Also the utilities using the password interfaces should be updated so > > they pass the username to the password server instead of the uid. > > Note that this is an interface change. We would like to have versioned > libhurduser and libmachuser before that, a wholly different task ;) Isn't adding an interface an option? It doesn't break anything and it will make it easier to switch. (I'm asking because I'd like to see this done :)). > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > (ext2fs) > > Maybe file_pager_write_page should be able to accurately reproduce holes > > > > priority: 3 > > difficulty: 5 > > > > When a block that is a part of a file is filled with zeros it doesn't > > have to be stored on disk. This is called a sparse file. > > > > Just before a block of a file is written to disk file_pager_write_page > > should check if that block is filled with zeros. It should allocate a > > should _not_ allocate whoops > > block on disk but just mark it as sparse instead. If a block was > > already allocated on disk it should be freed. Do you agree with this? (may I add this?) About the comments I didn't reply about, I will follow your advice. Thanks, Marco _______________________________________________ Bug-hurd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
