View Single Post
Old 05-29-2012, 07:47 AM   #160
knc1
Going Viral
knc1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.knc1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.knc1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.knc1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.knc1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.knc1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.knc1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.knc1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.knc1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.knc1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.knc1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
knc1's Avatar
 
Posts: 17,212
Karma: 18210809
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Central Texas
Device: No K1, PW2, KV, KOA
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
Yes, It's a really old one ... I thought it might be an interesting way to approach the issue of symlinks... but since it hasn't grabbed the attention of kernel programmers for so many years, it's probably not a good solution ...
The Linux Kernel Project has had one (or more) rounds of patent issues over the implementation of VFAT.
Ten years ago feels about right for when they where heavily engaged with MS on the matter.
So this patch might have been ignored due to those troubles, not due to the quality of the patch or the idea.

Note: This is one of the reasons for so many options on the VFAT system.
That allows the selection of a combination of options required to mount most of the other "almost FAT" file systems without trampling on anyone's I.P. rights.
knc1 is offline   Reply With Quote