On Mon, 2008-10-13 at 22:44 +0200, Jörn Engel wrote: > On Mon, 13 October 2008 13:39:21 +0200, Alexander Larsson wrote: > > > > Its only useless and bloat if you think the feature is useless, so we're > > once again back to your preferences in applications. I'd like to think > > that the opinions of others would be taken into consideration for this > > too, and I and others would like this feature. > > It is a tradeoff. How urgent is the feature, how much bloat will it > create, what's the mainenance load on people like Christoph. Since he > is one of the _very_ few people who actually carry the maintenance load, > I would take his advice rather seriously and try to convince him on > technical grounds. > > > Unfortunately I don't have time myself atm to implement this, but I hope > > someone else is interested in working on this. > > And this is a perfect example of how not to convince someone. Once you > have the time you might want to look at lsattr/chattr. Until then, this > discussion is a waste of readers time. I'm not really out to convince anyone to do this work for me, because I understand that nobody here is interested in file managers. However I don't think writing this is completely a waste of time. Consider it an expression of interest in having stat.st_flags implemented in Linux. I can use at least UF_HIDDEN and UF_IMMUTABLE in the file manager. Perhaps someone else is interested in this also and eventually the joint interest in it might get it implemented (it happened in FreeBSD after all). -- 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
