From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <14610.29880.728540.947675@charged.uio.no> Date: Fri, 5 May 2000 09:14:00 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Re: Updates to /bin/bash In-Reply-To: <39121254.F7F71DAC@directlink.net> References: <852568D5.006DBD55.00@raylex-gh01.eo.ray.com> <39121254.F7F71DAC@directlink.net> Reply-To: trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no From: Trond Myklebust Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Matthew Vanecek Cc: linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: >>>>> " " == Matthew Vanecek writes: >> On 4 May 2000, Trond Myklebust wrote: >> >> >Not good. If I'm running /bin/bash, and somebody on the server >> >updates /bin/bash, then I don't want to reboot my >> >machine. With the above >> > You wouldn't have to reboot. Why would you think you need to > reboot? This isn't Winbloze, for god's sake. All it means is > that new bash processes will use the updated version, while old > processes would still be using the old version--it's loaded in NO. This behaviour is exactly what Andreas patch would break. New processes would get a mixture of old and new versions because the page cache itself would be out of sync. > memory, remember? Hell, you can even overwrite the libc on a > running system. That is only true of files on local storage. We are discussing NFS, which is a stateless file system. Cheers, Trond -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux.eu.org/Linux-MM/