Re: cp(1) bug ?

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Artur Grabowski
Date: Sunday, October 21, 2007 - 4:30 pm

"Tom Van Looy" <assarix@pandora.be> writes:


no, it's not. It's the dumbed down "truth" so that you can explain to
random people what the hell Unix is, or rather to make them have a
dumb look on their face and nod.

A process is not a file, a memory region is not a file, the sysctl tree
is not a file, there's plenty of stuff that is as far from files as
you can get. Many directory operations are explicitly not done on file
descriptors because it would be too complicated.

//art
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: cp(1) bug ?, Tom Van Looy, (Sat Oct 20, 2:59 am)
Re: cp(1) bug ?, RW, (Sat Oct 20, 3:53 am)
Re: cp(1) bug ?, Paul de Weerd, (Sat Oct 20, 4:07 am)
Re: cp(1) bug ?, a.padilla, (Sat Oct 20, 5:22 am)
Re: cp(1) bug ?, Artur Grabowski, (Sun Oct 21, 4:30 pm)
Re: cp(1) bug ?, ropers, (Mon Oct 22, 11:22 am)