Rob Ross wrote:
File size is definitely one of the more difficult of the parameters,
either because (a) it isn't stored in one place but is instead derived,
or (b) because a lock has to be obtained to guarantee consistency of the
returned value.
OK, and looking at the man page again, it is already on the list in the
old proposal and hence optional. I've no problem with that.
I can't speak for everyone, but "ls" is the #1 consumer as far as I am
concerned.
So a syscall for ls alone?
I think this is more a user problem. For normal plain old 'ls' you get
by with readdir. For 'ls -F' and 'ls --color' you mostly get by with
readdir+d_type. If you cannot provide d_type info the readdirplus
extension does you no good. For the cases when an additional stat is
needed (for symlinks, for instance, to test whether they are dangling)
readdirplus won't help.
So, readdirplus is really only useful for 'ls -l'. But then you need
st_size and st_?time. So what is gained with readdirplus?
--
➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, CA ❖
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
