> > remember something similar to what Eric remembers: qid.vers of zero
> > means `don't cache'.  It might not be written down; it may have just
> > been oral folklore at the labs.
> 
> when the 9p2000 man pages were initially posted to this list for discussion,
> i made a suggestion to that effect, and i seem to recall rob
> saying "not a bad idea, but we haven't done it yet".

here you argue that using the qid.version to infer something about the
file is a good idea

> 
> >> this is not true of devsd devices.  the version is used to deal with
>> removable devices.  if you have a cd open and the media is changed,
>> i/o to the device will return Echange.
> 
> using qid.version to indicate the status of the underlying device
> rather than of the file data seems to me like an abuse of the system.
> surely a status file would be a better way of indicating media change?

yet here you argue that using the qid.version to indicate that the medium
underlying sdXX/data has changed is an "abuse".

to be a bit picky, the qid.version doesn't indicate the status of the device,
it indicates how many times the media have changed.

it doesn't make sense for a process to blithly continue writing to the
new medium without getting an error.  

- erik

Reply via email to