[lkml]   [2001]   [Nov]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Swap
    > This is 'nice' for the server, it doesn't have the overhead of maintaining
    > a file-system state. That's why servers are supposed to be read-only.
    > However, somebody has got to write the stuff to the file-system that's
    > going to (eventually) be read-only. Beware when such access occurs.

    But NFS still allows atomic rename() right? Isn't it considered essential to
    write the new executable or library under a different name, and then
    atomically rename() over the old one? If you write() directly into the
    executable, you will get what you deserve...


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:13    [W:0.023 / U:11.456 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site