Re: FS types

[Frank Naumann <fnaumann@prinz-atm.cs.Uni-Magdeburg.DE>]

Hi all!

> 2. Minix-FS
> 
> The MFS_INFO call you changed seems to be a bit Minix-FS specific.
> I don't think that we should extend something that was invented
> for a specific fs type and extend it to everything. Besides, this
> Dcntl opcode overlaps with the old MagiC's KER_DRVSTAT, so it's
> not a good idea to call it unless you are sure not to be running
> under MagiC. And what we want are less special cases, not more.

Yes, I agree.
 
> 3. Information I would like to see in a new Dcntl opcode
> 
> - Name of the XFS (see 1) in ASCII.
> 
> - Type of the filesystem. This should be something like a pair
>   of two longs, one for the generic type, one for special information.
>   Obviously, some fs types would need to be predefined.
> 
>   Some cases where I'd like to see this more structured information
>   are the different flavors of FAT you already mentioned, or the
>   different things one can find on a ISO9660 fs (long names,
>   Rockridge extensions, Joliet extensions) etc.
> 
> - And then probably some more ASCII fields containing a printable
>   string which describes the filesystem (like "ISO9660/Joliet"
>   or "VFAT32"). This would be used by tools like "df".
> 
> - Maybe some version numbering.

Ok, defined Dcntl's are:

>     Filesystem installation (MiNT)
>     
>  0xf0     1   FS_INSTALL          mint/file.h	
>  0xf0     2   FS_MOUNT            mint/file.h	
>  0xf0     3   FS_UNMOUNT          mint/file.h	
>  0xf0     4   FS_UNINSTALL        mint/file.h	

So I mean it's logical to use:

      Filesystem information (MiNT/MagiC)

   0xf1     1   FS_NAME     (write the name of the xfs)
   0xf1     2   FS_VERSION  (write major/minor version)
   0xf1     3   FS_TYPE     (write major/minor type of fs on drv)
   0xf1     4   FS_TYPE_ASC (write a human readable version of FS_TYPE)

and, for discussion:

FS_EJECT/FS_STOP/FS_LOCK (mapped to XHDI _for example_ (if available))
(-> kernel can look devices with opened files)

FS_AUTHOR 

> Besides, I really don't understand why Minix-FS does this remapping of
> the mounted device's root to the root of the device it's mounted on.
> This is very confusing and maybe could be changed.

Yes, we need a better mount/unmount support, that's right. Minix-xfs 
mount/unmount support is a quick hack.


Tschuess
   ...Frank

--
ATARI FALCON 040
--------------------------------------
Internet: fnaumann@cs.uni-magdeburg.de
Mausnet:  Frank Naumann @ L2