Jeff Vance <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>Here is the last (please) proposal for ":listf,access".
Oh, thank God! ;-)
<snip>
>:listfile @.work,8;seleq=[accessed=TRUE]
What do we see if none of the files in the fileset are being accessed? Does
it return us to a prompt? Do we get an error or warning?
<snip>
>Questions for format=ACCESS
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> #1 In the last example (/Special/....) where there is only 1 accessor
> the "O:1,R:0,W:1,L:0" is redundant. Should the summary accessor line,
> immediately below the filename line, be dropped when there is only
> one accessor?
No. Don't drop it; if it's dropped then we've introduced an inconsistency in
the command's behavior.
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> #2 For ;seleq=[ACCESSED=TRUE]: there are two kinds of accessors, 1) a
> normal open of the file, 2) a special open of the file that is used
> to prevent the file (or related data structures) from disappearing
> (sm_open). This second open does not return a file descriptor (fnum)
> and is used by backup products, :listf, and many other tools. I
assume
> that you consider an accessor to be both 1) and 2), but please let me
> know if this is true, or is a bad idea. Also, some files are
protected
> by the system by being opened at boot time (PROGEN is the accessor).
> Do you consider these files as being accessed, and do you want to see
> PROGEN (pin 1) as the accessor?
Yes, both 1 and 2 are accessors. However I'm mixed about wanting to know
what kind of #2 processes is performing the access; for example, while I
want to know about STORE, I don't care about LISTF,2. Yes, I consider
PROGEN (or FPROTECT) to be an accessor and I want to know about it.
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> #3 Do I need to worry about enough room for IPng addresses?
If "ng" means "next generation" then I think yes, it's prudent to plan for
it.
Great job Jeff!
-- Evan
|
