Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!usenix!jsq
From: aglew@crhc.uiuc.edu (Andy Glew)
Newsgroups: comp.std.unix
Subject: On-disk format of UNIX filesystems (Was: Re: make DOS a filesystem?)
Message-ID: <563@usenix.ORG>
Date: 1 Oct 90 05:10:37 GMT
References: <536@usenix.ORG> <537@usenix.ORG> <555@usenix.ORG> <562@usenix.ORG>
Sender: jsq@usenix.ORG
Organization: Center for Reliable and High-Performance Computing University of
Lines: 29
Approved: jsq@usenix.org (Moderator, John Quarterman)
X-Submissions: std-unix@uunet.uu.net

Submitted-by: aglew@crhc.uiuc.edu (Andy Glew)

>..> Discussions of using the System V filesystem switch to mount DOS directories
>
>I'm not sure what all this has to do with UNIX standards, though, as
>none of the existing UNIX standards specify the on-disk format of UNIX
>file systems (thank goodness!), they just specify the interface to
>functions that manipulate files.  

While I understand where the "thank goodness" comes from, I do rather
wish that there were some standards for the on-disk format of UNIX
filesystems.  Or am I the only person that has ever tried to transfer
UNIX filesystems on floppies between different systems?  Or (soon)
transfer UNIX filesystems on floptical disks?

Most of the filesystems standards work seems to be technology specific
- such as, the soon-to-become-official standard for CD-ROM filesystems
and other optical disks.  However, what I've seen of the CD-ROM
standard suggests that I am unlikely ever to be able to mount a CD-ROM
as the boot partition of my workstation...
    Q: what is the UNIX community's particpation in various
technology-oriented filesystems standardization efforts?  Does everyone 
feel confident that present and future UNIX filesystem semantics will be
completely supported by these standards?

--
Andy Glew, a-glew@uiuc.edu [get ph nameserver from uxc.cso.uiuc.edu:net/qi]

Volume-Number: Volume 21, Number 155