Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 10:13:56 +0100 From: David Malone <dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie> To: Valentin Nechayev <netch@iv.nn.kiev.ua> Cc: Ted Faber <faber@lunabase.org>, stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: tail Message-ID: <20010430101356.A62928@walton.maths.tcd.ie> In-Reply-To: <20010430110352.A646@iv.nn.kiev.ua>; from netch@iv.nn.kiev.ua on Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 11:03:52AM %2B0300 References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0104301632200.43352-100000@lists.unixathome.org> <KPECIILENDDLPCNIMLOFOEOICCAA.juha@saarinen.org> <20010429222205.A29058@praxis.lunabase.org> <20010430110352.A646@iv.nn.kiev.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 11:03:52AM +0300, Valentin Nechayev wrote: > Can you please prove nesessarity of such behavior, as really useful examples > of cat/tail of directory, or an example of needed compatibility? We have used tail here on (large) directories to find the last few entries and then delete them (using unlink) in the correct order so that you can get the kernel to shrink the directory quickly to speed up operations on it. This has arisen several times on news servers using inn's traditional storage. I'm sure other people have used standard tools on directories for other reasons. To prevent people from doing so is just an inconvienence. David. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010430101356.A62928>