Samba VFS: Is it really a Virtual File System API?

[Richard Sharpe]

On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 6:53 AM, Sergio Conde <sconde at dilmun.ls.fi.upm.es> wrote:
>
> I have some questions to begin with (and considering I have not started
> designing my module):
>
> Using opaque, should I make functional all the functions? Because there are
> some of them that I can't implement due provider API restriction (Such as
> all acl related functions, symlinks, chmod, maybe lseek. Other problem is
> that open/close are nonsense because I can only read and write).
> If I should implement all functions, will do the trick returning "OK it went
> well" and doing nothing?

The OPAQUE and TRANSPARENT notion seems to have gone out of use, at
least in the current code.

If you are synthesizing file descriptors, perhaps because your file
system is in user space (no, not a FUSE-based file system, which has
kernel-visible FDs) then you *must* implement all the VFS routines
because you cannot let your FDs get into the backstop module
(vfs_default.c).

If, however, you are simply augmenting the functionality provided by
an underlying file system, then you only have to implement those VFS
routines that are of interest to you.

-- 
Regards,
Richard Sharpe