Guys, I think both the inode number and name do have a use case. For file system developers observing the filesystem the inode number is very useful, and if you look at the ext4 tracing already in tree or the xfs tracing going in in the next window they use the inode number all over. Which btw brings up another good argument - to make the tracing really useful we need to have conventions. While the inode number seems to be a realtively easy one printing the device is more difficult. XFS just prints the raw major/minor to stay simple, ext4 has a complicated ad-hoc cache of device names, and this one just prints the superblock id string. Of course for a user the name is a lot more meaninful, but also relatively expensive to generate. Then again I'm not even sure how the last pathname component only here is all that useful - it can't be used to easily find the file. -- 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
