Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 07:30:47 +0100 From: "[LoN]Kamikaze" <LoN_Kamikaze@gmx.de> To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Clint Olsen <clint.olsen@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Source upgrade from 5.5 to 6.X not safe? Message-ID: <47394497.8000802@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <d763ac660711121753u358d4705vc558a8a46d741af7@mail.gmail.com> References: <20071102095628.GA796@0lsen.net> <472AF94B.1020600@gmx.de> <20071104200325.T91647@fledge.watson.org> <20071104211009.GC20861@0lsen.net> <4736BB24.8010905@gmx.de> <d763ac660711121753u358d4705vc558a8a46d741af7@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Adrian Chadd wrote: > On 11/11/2007, [LoN]Kamikaze <LoN_Kamikaze@gmx.de> wrote: >> If a binary/library that is currently used gets removed/replaced, it will be >> copied to memory. The process will not even recognize this. Only restarting >> the process will remove the old version from memory and cause the new one to >> be used. I thought every OS did it like that, so I'm surprised that there are >> systems causing problems in this case. > > Wha, when did that happen? I was always under the impression that > binaries/libraries were demand paged in and referenced as a VM object > via VFS; you could unlink/rename the file and the currently open > reference would still be valid. I didn't know that binaries and libraries keep a reference to the file they were created from. Anyway, to the user the whole thing is transparent.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?47394497.8000802>