|Re: [hatari-devel] Using device files as drive images?|
[ Thread Index |
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/hatari-devel Archives
- To: hatari-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [hatari-devel] Using device files as drive images?
- From: Uwe Seimet <Uwe.Seimet@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 19:34:47 +0200
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1413308087; l=936; s=domk; d=seimet.de; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Disposition:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Subject:To:From:Date; bh=zF6MkD+Sy2WscYdE2P+VnVQ80f8=; b=UQAKLR7Pef0tRNaKsHKnjslLJWylNenWmv2nVl2RaoxsoDByruIAroUN6ht5rldJNJX IMp/5TR9MERkp861WJygBrPp7385AeXSm0D/KDHZvcDRS6KCJO7qr93l69F8e+hwFE4+7 CqxqCggXXYQHDoR5R9ctbjQrcHx/XSBw3tU=
Thank you for checking the locking APIs.
> Don't use automount for things which you access also directly.
> Or at least make sure to unmount them before that.
Sure, but I was just wondering whether there might be a way to
technically address this issue.
> > And not to use device files with partitions that are mounted.
> How do you propose detecting that, by parsing /proc/mounts?
It was not my intention to propose anything. I was just wondering
whether this issue can be addressed.
> > With file images there is the same problem, but in practice
> > auto-mounting file images is much less common than auto-mounting
> > removable media.
> Are you suggesting using advisory locking to prevent
> multiple Hatari processes accidentally using the same
> image files?
;-) No, just for completeness sake I mentioned that not only device
files but also image files are affected.