Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I think that might just have been an oversight, and it seems entirely
> > reasonable for filesystems to refuse to do anything synchronous (let the
> > message queuing do it).
>
> If Thomas agrees, I will change it to simpleroutines, because I agre
On Sat, Jun 15, 2002 at 03:56:18PM -0400, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > Actually, fs_notify.defs is using routines, not simpleroutines, and we have
> > special hacks in libdiskfs and console to get simpleroutines... delivering
> > them synchronously would work as well, although it would not be so good
> Actually, fs_notify.defs is using routines, not simpleroutines, and we have
> special hacks in libdiskfs and console to get simpleroutines... delivering
> them synchronously would work as well, although it would not be so good if
> you have multiple clients.
I think that might just have been an
On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 06:14:06PM -0400, Roland McGrath wrote:
> Some things might use the vt100 scrolling region, which behaves like an
> atomic delete+insert line.
Oh sorry, you talk about indn and rin here, I didn't get this at first.
That's a capability the Linux console doesn't have either,
On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 06:14:06PM -0400, Roland McGrath wrote:
> Some things might use the vt100 scrolling region, which behaves like an
> atomic delete+insert line.
Sure, there are some such escape sequences, and they might even be used, in
particular in programs like text editors. However, as
Some things might use the vt100 scrolling region, which behaves like an
atomic delete+insert line.
File change notifications are always delivered asynchronously. So they can
only ever tell you what part of the file to examine later, not exactly what
all has happened there at the time you are loo
