*BSD News Article 6888


Return to BSD News archive

Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!sgiblab!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!hoptoad!kithrup!sef
From: sef@kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan)
Subject: Re: Repeat of the question about VFS and VOP_SEEK()
Organization: Kithrup Enterprises, Ltd.
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1992 22:15:15 GMT
Message-ID: <1992Oct21.221515.1707@kithrup.COM>
References: <1992Oct20.193544.2360@fcom.cc.utah.edu> <BwFu1E.759@pix.com> <1992Oct21.201738.22999@fcom.cc.utah.edu>
Lines: 16

In article <1992Oct21.201738.22999@fcom.cc.utah.edu> terry@cs.weber.edu (A Wizard of Earth C) writes:
>Historical reasons?
>An attempt at uniformity in VFS interfaces?
>The author thought that there was a 1:1 correspondance between system calls
>(like lseek) and VFS operations?

For the same reason, again, that VOP_OPEN exists, I'm sure:  to say that
such a thing cannot be done, if necessary.  Alternatively, it was designed,
and after they realized that VOP_SEEK wouldn't do anything, somebody already
had code that used it, so they left it in.

-- 
Sean Eric Fagan  | "Time and space is a bitch!"
sef@kithrup.COM  |    -- Gooshie (Dennis Wolfberg),
-----------------+       "Quantum Leap:  Killin' Time"
Any opinions expressed are my own, and generally unpopular with others.