> > > Consider the _very_ common case (that nobody has mentioned yet) where you
> > > are editing a large file. When you write to the file, the editor copies
> > > the file to a backup, then immediately truncates the original file and
> > > writes the new data there. What would be _far_ preferrable is to
> > > just
> >
> > Are you sure? I think editor just _moves_ original to backup.
>
> Hi,
>
> It would be so nice if all editors did that, but most don't according to the
> tests I've done, especially the newer ones like kedit, gnome-edit etc. I
> think this is largely due to developers not knowing why it's good to do it
> this way.
They need to get a clue. No need to work around their bugs in kernel.
Anyway copyfile syscall would be nice for other reasons. (cp -a kernel
tree then apply patch without waiting for physical copy to be done
would be handy).
Pavel
-- Casualities in World Trade Center: 6453 dead inside the building, cryptography in U.S.A. and free speech in Czech Republic. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/