gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn ) (07/23/87)
What is all this? I thought this was UNIX-WIZARDS? So why all the discussion about how to ADD unnecessary stuff to the OS kernel? The UNIX kernel has fully enough hooks to support applications managing file backups any way they wish. The raw UNIX system (and its shell user interface) has no business implementing any PARTICULAR file backup strategy; at that level it should do as it's told (copy data, remove a link, etc.) without trying to second-guess user intentions. Any specific policy for file management should be imposed by end-user interfaces -- which the UNIX shell is emphatically NOT. If you don't have a Macintosh-like user agent, then use my "Adventure shell" that knows how to reincarnate dead beasties. But don't clutter up the simple, direct program/programmer support environment with crap that assumes something non-universal about user intentions. It gets in the way of effective control of one's tools.
chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek) (07/23/87)
In article <6155@brl-smoke.ARPA> gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn) writes: >The raw UNIX system ... has no business implementing any PARTICULAR file >backup strategy.... Any specific policy for file management should be >imposed by end-user interfaces -- which the UNIX shell is emphatically NOT. Strange ... for once I agree with an opinion of Doug Gwyn's ... :-) On the other hand, the shell is a programmer interface as well as a language, and programmers, too, may want other file management policies. All this really means is that shells should be easier to write. -- In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 7690) Domain: chris@mimsy.umd.edu Path: seismo!mimsy!chris