-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 01:13:55AM +0100, Romain Tartière wrote: > On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 10:32:48AM -0800, Yuri wrote : > > In case of USB device (which device in question in this problem > > happens to be) usbd can be used to mount it. > > > > If attach/detach events trigger mount/unmount commands this problem > > shouldn't exist. I didn't try though. > > The problem is that the detach event can be caught only too late to > unmount the device properly. How may it be possible to sync a disk > ``as soon as it is detached'' (that is when it is not physically > connected to the computer anymore)? Mounting the disk read-only may > be a workaround, just as not caching writes (default behaviour of some > versions of Windows) and syncing the disk all the time, but this is > not as reliable as the mount system provided by Unix and Unix like > operating systems. > > AFAICR, this is the sole weakness of the FreeBSD operating system I > know :) And since it is, according to me, an operator error, the best > we can do is to use the system as it was designed for ;)
Off the top of my head, what is wrong/hard with just logging a device failure, discarding all remaining cached operations, and unmounting the fs when a disk device goes missing? I understand that this is not a viable solution for critical filesystems, but I can see nothing wrong with this approach for removable devices and/or non-critical fs's. Just my $0.02. \n\n -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: Nikos Ntarmos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> iD8DBQFHZ2ABm6J1ac+VFgoRAhWtAJ4uomUoe0IDVG0qG2W+t7y9ZSMjugCbBAoz LtIIMhMCk9iZ3NeStO8uwLU= =+o7j -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
