Message-Id:	<199704241124.NAA18259@grendel.sylaba.poznan.pl>
Comments:	Authenticated sender is <grendel@[150.254.113.14]>
From:	"Mark Habersack" <grendel AT hoth DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl>
Organization:	PPP (Pesticide Powered Pumpkins)
To:	pierre AT tycho DOT com
Date:	Thu, 24 Apr 1997 13:21:44 +0100
MIME-Version:	1.0
Subject:	Re: Usage of directory entries
Reply-to:	grendel AT hoth DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl
CC:	"Alaric B. Williams" <alaric AT abwillms DOT demon DOT co DOT uk>,
	Matthias DOT Paul AT post DOT rwth-aachen DOT de, opendos-developer AT delorie DOT com
References:	<Pine DOT BSI DOT 3 DOT 96 DOT 970423142220 DOT 12655I-100000 AT hoth DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl>
In-reply-to:	<Pine.LNX.3.95.970423210821.6868E-100000@55-174.hy.cgocable.ca>

Once upon a time (on 23 Apr 97 at 21:11) Pierre Phaneuf said:

> On Wed, 23 Apr 1997, Mark Habersack wrote:
> 
> > > What's more, it might find disk errors and things while it's at it, and
> > > raise suitable alerts.
> > I agree here - the error detection would be nice. But, IMHO, it would be
> > hard to make the defrag work in concert with swapfile managers and caches.
> > I don't know... just my opinion...
> 
> Things like file system checking and defragmentation are things better
> done while the file system is either unmounted or mounted read-only.
Exactly - in such a situation the system is in a known state and thus a 
possibility to damage anything vital is almost eliminated. But the idea with 
error detection by the file system code is excellent!
==================================================
Stand straight, look me in the eye and say goodbye
Stand straight, we drifted past the point of
  reasons why.
Yesterday starts tommorow, tommorow starts today
And the problems seem to be we're picking up the
  pieces of a ricochet...

- Raw text -