Message-Id: <199704281117.NAA23978@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: Lorier <lorier AT ihug DOT co DOT nz>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 13:17:04 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: Usage of directory entries
Reply-to: grendel AT hoth DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl
CC: pierre AT tycho DOT com, "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
In-reply-to: <m0wL67p-000Fn7C@hn.planet.gen.nz>
Precedence: bulk

Once upon a time (on 26 Apr 97 at 23:58) Lorier said:

> >> Things like file system checking and defragmentation are things better
> >> done while the file system is either unmounted or mounted read-only.
> >
> >You mean /more easily done/. 
> 
> Better: You don't have to "lock" files, you don't have race conditions and
> hundres of other problems... There is far more that can go wrong if your
> defragging AND allowing write access...  Adding up a CRC of something that
> changes 1/2 way through is going to make things go BANG I think :)
Why? It would just calculate CRC of the data being read and written and not 
that of the already written file.
==================================================
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...