From owner-freebsd-arch Sun Jul 16 14:25: 8 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from axl.ops.uunet.co.za (axl.ops.uunet.co.za [196.31.2.163]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2D3037B845 for ; Sun, 16 Jul 2000 14:24:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sheldonh@axl.ops.uunet.co.za) Received: from sheldonh (helo=axl.ops.uunet.co.za) by axl.ops.uunet.co.za with local-esmtp (Exim 3.15 #1) id 13Dvtv-000MnH-00; Sun, 16 Jul 2000 23:24:39 +0200 From: Sheldon Hearn To: alex@big.endian.de (Alexander Langer) Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: final call: truncate into the base system or not? In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 16 Jul 2000 22:55:43 +0200." <20000716225543.A7308@cichlids.cichlids.com> Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2000 23:24:39 +0200 Message-ID: <87622.963782679@axl.ops.uunet.co.za> Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sun, 16 Jul 2000 22:55:43 +0200, Alexander Langer wrote: > How, a final and ready-to-import version of truncate exists: > > http://people.freebsd.org/~sheldonh/truncate/ > > Since I can't recall any consensus whether importing or not, but only > about implementation details, I'd like to know, what the opinion of > _importing_ it into the base system is, _beside_ all implementation > details. For what it's worth, I've done an about-face on my earlier objection. As explained to me by my mentor, the fact that it won't often be used is outweighed by its usefulness when it _is_ needed and the fact that it's a simple interface to a user-requestable system call with user-visible effects. Ciao, Sheldon. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message