> 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...
Regards,
Dan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Nov 23 2001 - 21:00:25 EST