Moving open files

[Dotan Cohen]

2008/7/8 Leo Cacciari <leo.cacciari at gmail.com>:
>
> Il giorno lun, 07/07/2008 alle 20.14 +0300, Dotan Cohen ha scritto:
> ...
>> In my opinion, and the opinion of he who 'lost' his data, there should
>> be a lock file.
>>
>> > By all means, file a bug report, but I wouldn't be terribly surprised if
>> > they won't consider it.  Of course, if nobody files a bug report, they
>> > _definitely_ won't consider it :-)
>>
>> Thanks, I will file it. Maybe it could be optional.
> Well, I do not know. I found the idea stupid, but everyone is intitled
> to have stupid ideas, even me....
> The problem is: to work with _everithing_ (not just when you open the
> file with another OO, which already does), it should be a mandatory
> lock. Now, mandatory locks are always been a PITA in Linux. AFAIK, in
> the actual implementation, if you have a mandatory lock on a file an the
> process having set it crashes without removing it, the file will be
> _inaccessible_ to _all_ (even root), unless you reboot the system. Do
> you really want it?
>

Perhaps a system where the program checks to see that the file still
exists, and if not, then queries the filesystem to find out what
happened to it? It would be a pain to implement, I'm sure.

Dotan Cohen

http://what-is-what.com
http://gibberish.co.il
א-ב-ג-ד-ה-ו-ז-ח-ט-י-ך-כ-ל-ם-מ-ן-נ-ס-ע-ף-פ-ץ-צ-ק-ר-ש-ת

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?