[lkml]   [1996]   [Jun]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Drawbacks of implementing undelete entirely in user space
    On Sat, 22 Jun 1996, Hasdi R Hashim wrote:

    > Oookay... Just enlighten me: how would a kernelspace-level solution be
    > better than userspace-level solution?
    > Remember the undelete command in DOS? It was a hack. Undelete
    > feature was never thought of when DOS/FAT was designed. It was there by
    > accident. You see, when you delete a file in DOS, you are not deleting as
    > in deleting, but as in 'deleting'. :) That is, you are just MARKING them
    > for deletion; the first character of the file is overrwritten with a
    > special character (Now you know why UNDELETE ask you for the first
    > character?). The link to the chain of clusters (or blocks for you UNIX
    > geeks:) is still pointed by the file entry marked deleted.

    You just answered your own question: a kernel space solution is needed to
    prevent the undelete feature from being just a hack.

    Johan Myreen

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:37    [W:0.018 / U:7.864 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site