Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!henry From: henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards Subject: Re: Recovery possible from signal aborted write(2) ? Message-ID: <4372@utzoo.UUCP> Date: Wed, 26-Sep-84 16:23:03 EDT Article-I.D.: utzoo.4372 Posted: Wed Sep 26 16:23:03 1984 Date-Received: Wed, 26-Sep-84 16:23:03 EDT References: <3253@ecsvax.UUCP>, <138@rlgvax.UUCP>, <45@cithep.UucP> Organization: U of Toronto Zoology Lines: 13 > By the way, is there any reason to not have u directly readable? > It's been that way for about two years here at cithep, but I think > only two or three people know it! If you are absolutely, positively, stunningly confident that the data structures in u are *never* *ever* going to change in even the smallest way, then there is no reason not to have it readable. If you wish to preserve the option to change those data structures without having people scream, then neither u nor /dev/kmem should be readable at all. I think you can tell which I prefer. -- Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology {allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!henry