Re: [gamin] New inotify backend checked in

[Daniel Veillard <veillard redhat com>]

On Wed, Aug 03, 2005 at 09:33:06AM -0400, John McCutchan wrote:
> >   We should make the flood tests check for the deactivation of the
> > kernel monitoring, this could be different for inotify but this should
> > still be done. I need to double check dnotify15.py for analysis.
> 
> Well, the inotify backend will never deactivate kernel monitoring.

  I really disagree with this.

> Because I don't want to have to maintain the stat() trees. There are

  The kernel has no flow control. It then must be implemented at the user level.
It is not acceptable to argue about a specific problem in Dnotify support
to just cancel this fundamental property. inotify would not need to
maintain a tree of stat() info but one per cancleeled kernel monitor. You
are throwing the baby with the bath water, this is just wrong. If you drop
flow control, then gamin provides absolutely no added benefice on top of
inotify and I don't see the point of even maintaining a back-end for it !

> quite a few dnotifyisms on the test suite. But, I have verified the
> event stream in all the passing test cases. Could you run make tests
> with the latest code (using the dnotify backend)?

  they passed.

Daniel

-- 
Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat Desktop team http://redhat.com/
veillard redhat com  | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit  http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/