Re: File level action protocol
Re: File level action protocol
- Subject: Re: File level action protocol
- From: Thomas Tempelmann <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2005 12:10:11 +0200
Mike Smith wrote:
>It sounds like the asynchronous interface that Spotlight uses
>will probably be your best bet.
But doesn't do that some pre-filtering already? I like to know about
changes inside the /private tree, also in other "protected" folders the
user can choose.
>> As long as I can learn the File ID while I do the recording, I should
>> be fine.
>
>The interfaces available to you use paths, not File IDs
Which interfaces? I do not think I'll use Spotlight. Do you want to tell
me that the VNode number (which remains constant even if I move a file or
folder to a diffeent dir, right?) is not exposed anywhere outside of the
kernel-level file system?
>> On HFS+, they do, and that's all I care about.
>
>But you want to know about "all" files, and there may be many files
>*not* on HFS+
Sure, for what I have in mind, all files will be on HFS+.
I don't care to support those who think they need to use a UFS volume,
neither do I care to log changes on an external FAT disk.
Thomas
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Darwin-kernel mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden