You all are being silly.
Copying the whole disk is painfully slow.
And i've heard of automounters that check the drive every x secs to see if
there's a disk in it.
First things first, we shouldn't give a fsck if the user puts in a disk or
not, atleast not when he puts it in.
When we care is when he tries to access the mount point, then we check for a
disk and mount if there is one.
Polling the disk every x secs is just stupid, we have no need to mount until
he tries to access it anyway.
The only good way to handle removed it is like the macitoshes do, make you
click a button or type a command to eject it.
Other than that, before doing any writes we probably should check to make
sure we have the same disk, and bitch
otherswise. Maybe we need a mount option that causes the fs's to verify
they still have the same disk before writting?
The hard part is figuring out how to complain. You almost need a special
way for writes to return errors on this sort of
thing. I really don't see what's so hard about saying "Click this button
before taking the disk out so that, unlike windows,
you know its really done saving your important file."
This works really well when there isn't an eject button or it can be locked
like cd-roms =)
One thing you could do is have some sort of nullfs or a writethru ramfs
union mounted over the floppy where you write the
file if the disk is removed, so the data isn't lost, and prompt the user to
put that damn disk back in.
Or, we could just make sure the light stays on the whole time until we
umount it. That way the user would remember to
click the button.
--Tim
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jun 15 2000 - 21:00:27 EST