tech-userlevel archive   Re: libquota proposal  On Wed, Mar 23,
2011 at 05:11:21PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:  >>>>>>>> (also,
edquota and repquota seem fs-independent to me...)  >>>>>>> no,
they're not: they can directly the quota1 file specified in the
>>>>>>> fstab if quotactl fails or the filesystem is not
mounted.  >>>>>> That's a bug, or more accurately legacy
behavior that doesn't need to  >>>>>> be supported.   >>>>> of
course it's not nice. But we're talking about existing code
calling   >>>>> the  >>>>> legacy quotactl. If we're going to
change it to not check the fstab  >>>>> options any more, we may
as well change it to use libquota.  >>>> I don't understand -
surely edquota and repquota go through your  >>>> proplib
interface now?  >>> We were talking about code like netatalk,
which is why I propose  >>> a public library for this.  >> Uh,
now I really don't understand.  > what don't you understand ?
You said that edquota and repquota aren't fs-independent; I
asked why, given that they should