On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 05:11:58PM -0500, Jeff Moyer wrote:
==> Regarding Re: [Wlug] xbiff; Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com> adds:
==> Regarding Re: [Wlug] xbiff; Jeff Kinz <jkinz@kinz.org> adds: jkinz> Also- didn't something called "inotify" just make it into the jkinz> kernel? I think that is also a file change notification utility?
jmoyer> It's not in the kernel as of 2.6.10. There are patches, of course,
Its in Andrew's tree, with patches being applied (quickly) as people find problems. :)
jmoyer> but even if it were in the kernel, it wouldn't be a drop in jmoyer> replacement for xbiff (obviously).
Ya, its a lower level facility one would use to build an xbiff replacement.
jmoyer> Though, it wouldn't be too difficult to write a replacement using jmoyer> inotify.
Ah, yes, quite. :)
I just looked into this further. It seems inotify, in its current form, has little chance of inclusion in mainstream kernels. Al Viro puked all over it, and with good reason.
Al did point out a problem with a umount call in the middle of a inotify operation, but someone else (Mike Waychison) provided a patch for that problem. (Which may or may not be accepted, but Robert seems to like it). (FOI "For other's information" - background) Inotify is supposed to provide the low level dnotify-like functionality but with a much lower resource impact. I like that (assuming it can be done.) I've always hated seeing how much CPU fam was using, it seems like such a waste for something that appears to be trivial. (but like all things, may be harder than they appear). -- http://www.scaled.com/projects/tierone/ http://www.fedoratracker.org http://www.fedorafaq.org http://www.fedoranews.org Jeff Kinz, Emergent Research, Hudson, MA.