Re: [bug #24140] Painfully slow find(1) in list-permission-only AFS paths

2008-09-01 Thread Daniel Richard G.
Hi Jeffrey, On Mon, 2008 Sep 01 20:25:11 -0400, Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote: > --On Monday, September 01, 2008 11:12:31 PM + "Daniel Richard G." > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >If we use libafs, we may as well go all the way and have find(1) check > >the permissions on each directory (if in AFS

[bug #24140] Painfully slow find(1) in list-permission-only AFS paths

2008-09-01 Thread Daniel Richard G.
Follow-up Comment #9, bug #24140 (project findutils): You would be open to a compile-time option to link against the AFS libraries? (I was under the impression that this existed in past versions, and was removed at some point.) If we use libafs, we may as well go all the way and have find(1) che

[bug #24140] Painfully slow find(1) in list-permission-only AFS paths

2008-09-01 Thread James Youngman
Follow-up Comment #8, bug #24140 (project findutils): On the basis of an earlier conversation with Jeffrey Hutzelman, I would assume that on systems where AFS is available (i.e. AFS libraries were detected at configure time) we can use a pioctl() call to check whether we're inside an AFS volume e

[bug #24140] Painfully slow find(1) in list-permission-only AFS paths

2008-09-01 Thread James Youngman
Follow-up Comment #7, bug #24140 (project findutils): I very much prefer to avoid an approach like -nostatdtu. You're right that it would in principle be quite like -noleaf. The problem is that people don't enable -noleaf even in cases where they should. >From a discussion I had with Jeffrey