Re: An answer to metadata, complete.

[Kevin Littlejohn <darius connect com au>]

Hrm.

The problem with the LD_PRELOAD option is that, if you're using it to cover
silly things like people 'mv'ing the files, you have to have the LD_PRELOAD
in existance for _everything_ you do - that's not viable in some environments
(eg. mine, where we have NFS-mounted heterogenous systems - I'd need the
LD_PRELOAD to be not only in all of my own environments on all of the machines
I log into (with the library installed on all of them, across multiple
architectures and OS'es), but also in the environment of all my cow-orkers,
who are likely to manipulate 'my' files.

If this stuff is going to be integrated into gnome, please make sure it
_always_ happens with the option to switch the metadata stuff off and still
work as well as it can - 'cause if it breaks because we can't LD_PRELOAD,
then it's useless to people in non-trivial environments.
And if it works without the preload, make sure it will re-synch if the
preload comes back on - 'cause there are cases where I'll want to use the
preload on my own desktop, but can't on the main server, but I'm manipulating
the same files, for example (or, another example, your sysadmin shuffles some
of the files you're using, and you've got preload, and he hasn't - universities
are a place where this sort of thing may happen).

That's my 2 cents :)

KevinL
> 
> Oh yes, useing the "file" program for defaults is the right way to go,
> I agree, but that does not negate anything I said. The use of "file" would
> only work for system defaults, user setting on single files would have no use
> for it. Now if your stating that haveing control down to a single file is not
> needed, well it's an opinion, and in my view a short sited one. No ofence
> if thats not what you ment. Personaly, a gui without true metadata, on
> a per file basis, is not only less functional, but almost useless. Metadata
> IS the only use I have for gui file management, with out it, I'll take bash
> any day. I like gui's, but a gui must be good enough to exceed what I'm
> already useing. eg, X + many xterms. And you'll also note that, metadata
> without the ability to keep track of it out side it's control library(1), is
> as useless as no metadata, imho.
> 
> 1: eg, you have metadata atached to a file, go into bash and "mv" the file,
> some where else. Databases alone can not handle this, but takeing from
> libvfs's use of LD_PRELOAD to over ride basic libc functions, with extened
> versions that can be used to track the files, and keep databases updated.
> Contrary to your belife, this is not a costly system, as any desktop that
> has metadata in a database (CDE,dfm,dare I mention windows? I feel dirty...)
> do this anyway, but at the library level. This means that there databases get
> corupted. Gnome, with out this system, will end up useing user level databases
> anyway, as sevel developers have agreed that metadata is nessessary, but
> with this system, the tracking code is moved to a global state instead of a user
> state, so database coruption will not be possable with the exception of system
> crashes. The speed will be the same either way, but one has far greater
> functionality.