IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

IWETHEY Home / IWETHEY Board / Open Forum / Why not simply create a background process
Post #3,575
by Simon_Jester
8/2/01 12:26:51 AM
8/2/01 12:27:32 AM
Reply
New Why not simply create a background process
that every hour or so creates a (hard, not symbolic) link to the files in those important directories? (Say to a /saved directory). rm is only going to remove the file if all of the inodes are gone, and since an inode for the file exist (to /saved) the file won't be deleted.


Kewl thing is, all it costs in space is an extra directory entry. If you really want to have fun, this background process is owned by someone else and users won't be able to delete files through it. (They can overwrite files with an empty file, howeverm and the background process will pick it up.)

Expand Edited by Simon_Jester Aug. 2, 2001, 12:27:32 AM EDT
Expand All History
Post #3,747
by deSitter
Picture of deSitter
8/3/01 1:06:04 PM
Reply
New Good Admin = Lack of Hacks
Do things the right way - pay attention, be careful, and keep backups.
     Unix at its worst - (Arkadiy) - (21) - Aug. 1, 2001, 12:16:14 PM EDT
         Oh, good idea! -NT - (jlalexander) - Aug. 1, 2001, 12:26:38 PM EDT
         That freakin' rocks! - (Yendor) - Aug. 1, 2001, 02:07:32 PM EDT
         Why not simply create a background process - (Simon_Jester) - (1) - Aug. 2, 2001, 12:27:32 AM EDT
             Good Admin = Lack of Hacks - (deSitter) - Aug. 3, 2001, 01:06:04 PM EDT
         A crutch - (kmself) - (2) - Aug. 2, 2001, 10:18:07 PM EDT
             100% Correct - (deSitter) - (1) - Aug. 3, 2001, 12:59:39 PM EDT
                 - - (dash dash) - (kmself) - Aug. 4, 2001, 05:30:55 PM EDT
         Sounds unnecessarily complicated. - (pwhysall) - (12) - Aug. 3, 2001, 02:48:54 AM EDT
             Better, But Also Bad - (deSitter) - (11) - Aug. 3, 2001, 01:02:00 PM EDT
                 Agree - (pwhysall) - Aug. 4, 2001, 02:12:37 AM EDT
                 Just thinkin... - (pwhysall) - (9) - Aug. 4, 2001, 04:33:45 AM EDT
                     Triumph of the practical over the Pure? - (Ashton) - (8) - Aug. 4, 2001, 03:58:37 PM EDT
                         That extra [Y] - unacceptable. - (Andrew Grygus) - (7) - Aug. 4, 2001, 08:42:22 PM EDT
                             Re: That extra [Y] - unacceptable. - (cforde) - (1) - Aug. 5, 2001, 01:28:58 AM EDT
                                 OK disable w/scripts natch. But: 'self-destruct CR'?____:[ -NT - (Ashton) - Aug. 5, 2001, 03:44:07 AM EDT
                             Not really. - (pwhysall) - (4) - Aug. 5, 2001, 05:39:18 AM EDT
                                 Personally.. prefer: wombat foo. Nice ring to it - -NT - (Ashton) - (3) - Aug. 5, 2001, 03:32:23 PM EDT
                                     Re: Personally..., I prefer: foo man choo. :) -NT - (a6l6e6x) - (2) - Aug. 5, 2001, 03:40:30 PM EDT
                                         LRPD settles All! - (Ashton) - Aug. 5, 2001, 04:21:16 PM EDT
                                         Hey! That's my other alternate personality! - (tseliot) - Aug. 6, 2001, 02:03:57 PM EDT
         much better way - (boxley) - Aug. 4, 2001, 07:25:21 PM EDT

How convenient is that??
61 ms