Chris Snook wrote: > But what you're talking about *will* break userspace. If I do an ls in > a directory, and get pages upon pages of versions of just one file, > that's broken. If I tar up a directory and get a tarball that's > hundreds of times larger than it should be, that's broken. If you want > the files to be hidden from userspace applications that don't know about > your backup scheme, (and it sounds like you do) then use the existing > convention for hidden files, the prepended '.' This is the universal > sign for "don't mess with me unless you know what you're doing". The idea was that if you did an ls you would get the latest version of the file without the :revision_num. The only visible version would be the latest version, i.e. the current system would not change. The idea was that it would only show earlier versions if they were specifically requested with a :revision_num suffix. In that case the filesystem/kernel would need to recognise the suffix and return the earlier version of the file. The only userspace it would break is files with :num in their name, as I haven't seen any files like that I don't think its too big a problem but the way of specifiying revisions could be changed. Jack - 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
