> "François Revol" <revol@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > How could that be dangerous? And the inefficiency just means one > > > more > > > layer which wouldn't be that bad (if it has to go there, it'll > > > need > > > to load stuff from a slow CD anyway). > > Hmm deadlocks maybe ? Even with O_NOCACHE or whichever, it might > > have > > issues I'd rather avoid. > > It doesn't. That was just a bug in the way BeOS worked, apart from > the > extra layer, there is nothing to worry about. Fine then, I'll try the simple way first, and slap you if it doesn't work ;) > > > And then, I think an attribute layer for iso9660 would be the > > > better > > > solution for CD booting, at least, so that the user can see the > > > files > > > on the disk. > > > The fs layering is already in place, all what's missing is an > > > example > > > implementation :-) > > Right... > > Hehe :-) Also, I'd first want to come up with a consensus on a common storage format for xattrs with the fd.o folks. They have a standard for it but it doesn't exactly fix our semantics (though parts do). François.