[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:0.043 / U:0.136 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site