Re: Safe file update library ready (sort of)
Shachar Shemesh writes ("Re: Safe file update library ready (sort of)"):
> I'm sorry, it might be me, but I fail to see the overlap between the
> functionalities of safewrite vs. userv. The premises for safewrite is
> that a program wants to make sure data integrity is maintained when
> writing files. Userv seems to be about trust and a user level tool. The
> two seem to revolve around two completely different interpretations to
> the word "safe", as well as two completely different use scenarios.
>
> Am I missing something here?
Sorry, I replied to the wrong message. I meant to reply to Adam
Borowski's comment, where he wrote:
] There's a race condition:
]
] while [ 1 ]; do ln -s /etc/passwd somefile.tmp; done
] "Hey root, could you please use this program using libsafewrite on
] 'somefile'?"
Having said that, I don't think the concept behind your library is
sound, because it presupposes that all previous programs which update
files are buggy.
Just because some wrongheaded Linux kernel filesystem developers think
that almost all previously written Unix programs are buggy, doesn't
mean that it's true or that the right fix is to rewrite every program.
Ian.
Reply to: