On Jun 18 2007 14:34, Tomas M wrote:
>
> Good morning. I'd like to kindly offer a paid job to someone
> interested. I'm willing to pay $500 for it, nevertheless I'm open
> to all suggestions. I hope it's OK to post this offer here.
>
> I'd like to see some features implemented in VFAT filesystem, which
> would be available per a mount option, for example:
>
> mount -t vfat -o unix /dev/hda1 /mnt
>
> There has been many attempts to implement some of these features in
> vfat lately, while no implementation actually made it's way to
> Kernel. Umsdos was removed from kernel as well (which was a good
> idea indeed).
>
> I agree that people shouldn't use VFAT at all :) as there are many
> filesystems for Linux which are more suitable for day-to-day work.
> But the amount of attempts to enhance vfat shows that many people
> really need some (even limited) improvements to vfat for some
> purpose.
>
> So here is what I need:
>
> - special file support (symlink,pipe,fifo,socket,c devs,b devs)
> - executable / not executable bit
> Nothing more is needed at all.
Does a FUSE fs cut it? Trying to hide Unix fluff inside VFAT
structures is an evil thing (“What Would Windows Do?”),
so the UMSDOS approach seems fine enough. I've almost got a working
implementation, just needs actual testing.
> I believe there is some spare space in the VFAT structure to
> implement these easily. I believe we just need one single byte, I
> would use lcase char, while the other infos (eg. major/minor
> numbers, link target, etc..) would be stored inside the particular
> special file (so not in the metadata). But your implementation is
> up to you, of course.
>
> Requirements:
>
> - The code must be clean so it could possibly be included in
> Kernel, nevertheless it's not required to be accepted by kernel
> people - they sometimes tend to reject interesting stuff, this is
> something I can live with :)
>
> - The filesystem must be perfectly readable in Windows.
>
> - All files created in Windows (or in Linux without the mount
> option) should appear as a regular non-executable files in Linux
> after the mount option is used.
>
> Payment:
>
> As noted at the top of this message, I'm willing to pay $500 to the
> developer of these changes. I don't know how easy/hard would it be
> do implement, so if you say why the price should be bigger, I'll
> reconsider it. I believe it's a fair offer.
>
> Payments are possible by paypal, wire transfer or money in the envelope.
>
> If you are willing to develop requested changes, let me know
> please, I'll wait till 19th of January for answers and then I'll
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> post a message to the list who will do it (if somebody is found).
>
> Thank you very much
Please don't name my name.
Thanks,
Jan
--
