Samuel Thibault, le dim. 18 nov. 2018 13:46:22 +0100, a ecrit: > Svante Signell, le dim. 18 nov. 2018 13:44:40 +0100, a ecrit: > > On Sun, 2018-11-18 at 01:13 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > > I don't remember the discussion which refused this solution. I guess > > > your working solution is to implement the record-lock in trivfs > > > itself? It sort of makes sense to me actually: the data of the > > > underlying node and the data of the node exposed by the translator > > > are not really related, I don't see why we should necessarily proxy > > > the lock. Apparently the only parts which are proxied are file access > > > permissions and time, i.e. information of the inode itself. > > > > Do you say that you are suddenly interested in the proposal I made in > > 2016? > > Well, yes?
Just to be clear: it's not "sudden", I had that couple of mails between Justus and you in my inbox since then, burried behind hundreds of other mails. The IRC discussion just raised that something was blocked there. Samuel
