Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 24 Jun 1996 07:24:45 +0300 (EET DST) | From | Johan Myréen <> | Subject | Re: 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 jem@iki.fi
|  |