Subject: Re: bug#10349: tail: fix --follow on FhGFS remote file systems

From: Pádraig Brady <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 23:48:19 +0000

On 12/22/2011 09:50 PM, Alan Curry wrote:
> Bob Proulx writes:
>>
>> Jim Meyering wrote:
>>> Are there so many new remote file systems coming into use now?
>>> That are not listed in /usr/include/linux/magic.h?
>>
>> The past can always be enumerated.  The future is always changing.  It
>> isn't possible to have a complete list of future items.  It is only
>> possible to have a complete list of past items.  The future is not yet
>> written.
> 
> Between past and future is the present, i.e. the currently running kernel.
> Shouldn't it return an error when you use an interface that isn't implemented
> by the underlying filesystem? Why doesn't this happen?

That's a fair point.

Eric shouldn't some/all remote file systems in the kernel
return ENOTSUP for inotify operations?

We'd still need to handle this in `tail` for unpatched kernels,
but going forward it would decrease the coreutils maintenance burden.

cheers,
Pádraig.