194 lines
5.7 KiB
Plaintext
194 lines
5.7 KiB
Plaintext
|
FEATURES
|
||
|
|
========
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Contents:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
2.0 Operations on image tree
|
||
|
|
2.1 ECMA-119
|
||
|
|
2.2 Rock Ridge
|
||
|
|
2.3 Joliet
|
||
|
|
2.4 El-Torito
|
||
|
|
2.5 UDF
|
||
|
|
2.6 HFS/HFS+
|
||
|
|
2.7 Others
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
===============================================================================
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
2.0 Operations on image tree
|
||
|
|
-----------------------------
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Basic:
|
||
|
|
- We HAVE TO Support addition of directories
|
||
|
|
- From filesystem
|
||
|
|
- From filesystem recursively
|
||
|
|
- New on image
|
||
|
|
- We HAVE TO support addition of files
|
||
|
|
- From local filesystem
|
||
|
|
- From previous/ms images
|
||
|
|
- We HAVE TO support addition of other POSIX file types
|
||
|
|
- From filesystem
|
||
|
|
- New on image
|
||
|
|
- Types: symlinks, block/char devices, fifos, sockets...
|
||
|
|
- We HAVE TO support modification of file names on image
|
||
|
|
- We HAVE TO support modification of POSIX attributes:
|
||
|
|
- Uid/Gid
|
||
|
|
- Permissions (we DON'T HAVE TO support full mode modification,
|
||
|
|
as we don't want a dir to be changed to a reg file!!)
|
||
|
|
- Timestamps
|
||
|
|
- We HAVE TO support deletion of nodes.
|
||
|
|
- We HAVE TO support iteration of directory tree.
|
||
|
|
- We WANT TO support direct getting (without iteration) of the number of
|
||
|
|
nodes in a directory.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Extras:
|
||
|
|
- We WANT TO support on-the-fly modification of file contents, to
|
||
|
|
allow things like compression and encryption.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Notes: many operations will need RR extensions to be actually reflected on
|
||
|
|
the image.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
===============================================================================
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
2.1 ECMA-119
|
||
|
|
------------
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Support for ECMA-119 (ISO-9660) specification.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
2.1.1 Creation
|
||
|
|
--------------
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
We HAVE TO support creation of new images.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
General:
|
||
|
|
- We HAVE TO support single volume images
|
||
|
|
- We DON'T NEED TO support multiple volume images.
|
||
|
|
It seems multiple volume images are not used.
|
||
|
|
- We HAVE TO support bootable volumes (see 2.4 in this doc)
|
||
|
|
Conformance:
|
||
|
|
- We HAVE TO support Level 1 restrictions (ECMA-119 10.1)
|
||
|
|
- We HAVE TO support Level 2 restrictions (ECMA-119 10.2)
|
||
|
|
Single Section files have a theoric size limit of 4GB (data length
|
||
|
|
is a 32-bit number, see ECMA-119 9.1.4). However I think I have
|
||
|
|
read that only files up to 2GB are supported.
|
||
|
|
- We MAY support full Level 3 (ECMA-119 10.3)
|
||
|
|
Multiple file sections are useful to support files higher than
|
||
|
|
level 2 limit. However, it seems it's a feature not supported in
|
||
|
|
most O.S. nowadays, so it's not very useful.
|
||
|
|
- We DON'T WANT TO support files recording in interleaved mode
|
||
|
|
(ECMA-119 6.4.3)
|
||
|
|
It seems a feature that it's not used.
|
||
|
|
- We DON'T WANT TO support associated files (ECMA-119 6.5.4)
|
||
|
|
What is that? Is it used?
|
||
|
|
- We DON'T WANT TO support Volume Partitions (ECMA-119 8.6)
|
||
|
|
What is that? Is it used?
|
||
|
|
- We DON'T WANT TO support extended attribute records (ECMA-119 9.5)
|
||
|
|
It seems an unused feature. RR is a better alternative.
|
||
|
|
- We DON'T NEED TO support file versions other than 1.
|
||
|
|
Restrictions:
|
||
|
|
- We HAVE TO provide a way to relax iso restrictions related to
|
||
|
|
filenames, allowing:
|
||
|
|
- Higher filename length, up to 37 chars (ECMA-119 7.5.1/7.6.3)
|
||
|
|
- Omit version number (ECMA-119 7.5.1)
|
||
|
|
- Directory hierarchy deeper than 8 levels / 255 path length
|
||
|
|
(ECMA-119 6.8.2.1)
|
||
|
|
- More characters in filenames, not only d-characters
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
2.2.2 Reading
|
||
|
|
-------------
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
General
|
||
|
|
- We HAVE TO support the reading of iso images
|
||
|
|
- We DON'T NEED TO support reading of features we don't support in
|
||
|
|
creation (see 2.2.1 above)
|
||
|
|
- We HAVE TO support reading arbitray file contents inside image
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
2.2.3 Modification/growing
|
||
|
|
--------------------------
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
General
|
||
|
|
- We HAVE TO support creation of new images from the contents of
|
||
|
|
an existing image
|
||
|
|
- We HAVE TO support multissession images
|
||
|
|
- We HAVE TO support growing of images
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
===============================================================================
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
2.2 Rock Ridge
|
||
|
|
--------------
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
- We HAVE TO support ALL Rock Ridge features, with these exceptions:
|
||
|
|
- We DON'T NEED TO support SF System User Entry (RRIP 4.1.7), used to
|
||
|
|
encode sparse files.
|
||
|
|
- We MIGHT support BACKUP timestamp (RRIP 4.1.6)
|
||
|
|
- We HAVE TO support any charset in RR filenames, and not only POSIX portable
|
||
|
|
filename character set (RRIP 3.4.1). Namely, UTF-8 SHOULD BE the default for
|
||
|
|
RR filenames.
|
||
|
|
- We MIGHT support Linux specific ZF extension, to allow transparent
|
||
|
|
compression.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
===============================================================================
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
2.3 Joliet
|
||
|
|
----------
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
- We HAVE TO support ALL Joliet features, with these exceptions:
|
||
|
|
- We DON'T KNOW what to do with UCS-2 conformance level 1 and 2 (scape
|
||
|
|
sequences '%\@' and '%\C'). What's this???????
|
||
|
|
- We DON'T KNOW what to do with CD-XA extensions.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
===============================================================================
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
2.4 El-Torito
|
||
|
|
-------------
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
- We HAVE TO El-Torito standard with a single boot image.
|
||
|
|
- We MAY support multiple boot images and boot entry selection.
|
||
|
|
- El Torito standard is not very clear about how to do that.
|
||
|
|
- We HAVE TO support both emulation and not emulation mode.
|
||
|
|
- We HAVE TO support 80x86 platform. We MAY support Power PC and Mac platforms.
|
||
|
|
- We HAVE TO provide improved support for isolinux boot images, namely patching
|
||
|
|
features.
|
||
|
|
- We HAVE TO support El-Torito in ms images.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
===============================================================================
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
2.5 UDF
|
||
|
|
-------
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
===============================================================================
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
2.6 HFS/HFS+
|
||
|
|
------------
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
===============================================================================
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
2.7 Others
|
||
|
|
----------
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
- We HAVE TO support sorting of file contents on image
|
||
|
|
- We HAVE TO support inode caching to prevent the same file to be written
|
||
|
|
several times into the image
|
||
|
|
- We DON'T NEED TO support TRANS.TBL files
|
||
|
|
- We DON'T NEED TO support padding of images
|
||
|
|
- Padding should be part of the burning process
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|