"good" editors [was Re: Improving the performance of system boot by eliding unused rc.d scripts and caching the result]
Mouse <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.netbsd.devel.userlevel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
> Using a sub-standard editor to change the files might change the > directory as a side effect of updating a file in it, but something > simple like cp new-rc-file /etc/rc.d/script will not (assuming the > script existed already) and nor would editing the file with a good > editor. The point as it bears on thorpej's scheme is valid. But I take issue with the implication that using "write temp file and rename() into place" to save files automatically makes an editor bad. When the file is a plain file with st_nlink==1, in a directory the user running the editor can write to, this is arguably better than simply overwriting the file - and that's a relatively common case. /~\ The ASCII Mouse \ / Ribbon Campaign X Against HTML [email protected] / \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B