<html><body> <tt>> > Ultimately, the part where we differ most, is the processing of information in > > fs/dcache.c to give dynamic updates in response to file system activity (such > > as attaching audit information to an auditable file whose inode just changed). > > I believe this should be kept seperate and not part of this framework nor Inotify. > > It's a specific requirement for audit, but not for Inotify. This is one of the places > > the two systems are functionally different. > > I don't think it should be different. If inotify wants to just ignore > this information, it can. </tt> <tt>Doesn't this mentality bring with it the risk of bloating a framework that should be as</tt> <tt>"trim" as possible? A seperation of functionality, while it might not be a large issue</tt> <tt>between these two systems, brings with it the expectation that any other systems</tt> <tt>using this common framework to keep their specific requirements seperate, </tt> <tt>not inflating, and therefore complicating, what could, and should, be a lightweight</tt> <tt>framework.</tt> <tt>Mike</tt> </body></html>