From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Apr 2 10:49:10 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id KAA05930 for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 2 Apr 1995 10:49:10 -0700 Received: from mail.barrnet.net (MAIL.BARRNET.NET [131.119.245.10]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id KAA05924 for ; Sun, 2 Apr 1995 10:49:09 -0700 Received: from aries.ibms.sinica.edu.tw by mail.barrnet.net (8.6.10/BARRNET-Len-Rose) id KAA03661; Sun, 2 Apr 1995 10:48:53 -0700 Received: (from taob@localhost) by aries.ibms.sinica.edu.tw (8.6.11/8.6.9) id BAA21923; Mon, 3 Apr 1995 01:48:02 +0800 Date: Mon, 3 Apr 1995 01:48:02 +0800 (CST) From: Brian Tao cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: any interest? In-Reply-To: <199504020629.WAA24567@violet.berkeley.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Sat, 1 Apr 1995, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > > From: nils@guru.stgt.sub.org (Cornelis van der Laan) [...] > The usual way under SunOS is 'mkfile 4m /some/file'. This way > no disk blocks are allocated until they are actually needed. If we had a filesystem that dealt with sparse files correctly, this would be a no-brainer (create a file, set the EOF to however far you want). Is there a requirement that swapfiles be contiguous under FreeBSD? -- Brian ("Though this be madness, yet there is method in't") Tao taob@gate.sinica.edu.tw <-- work ........ play --> taob@io.org