Subject: RE: Openattr issues/clarifications

From: "Khan, Saadia" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 11:24:04 -0700

Are named attributes only supported for files or can directories 
have named attributes too?

thanks,
Saadia

-----Original Message-----
From: Spencer Shepler [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2001 7:09 AM
To: [email-masked]'
Subject: Re: Openattr issues/clarifications

On Sun, Noveck, Dave wrote:
> 
> I think the simplest way of accommodating multiple styles of
> implementation of this feature is to add a boolean parameter to
> OPENATTR.  If FALSE, OPENATTR would fail if there were no
> named attributes associated with the file.  This would be
> open for interrogate.  If TRUE, it would not fail if there
> were not attributes (or no such directroy although that is
> not something that is explicitly visible in the protocol).
> That would open to modify and it would fail on a read-only
> fs.  Creation per se of the named attribute directory would
> not be called out as a protocol-visible event but it would
> allow an implementation to avoid superfluous creations when
> only interrogations are required. 
> 

This seems like a reasonable protocol modification.

Anyone else have an opinion?

Spencer

---

From: Spencer Shepler <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 14:30:46 -0500

The protocol is written in a way that allows named attributes
on all file system objects.

-- 

- Spencer -