Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!hsdndev!cmcl2!kramden.acf.nyu.edu!brnstnd
From: brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.internals
Subject: Re: holes in files
Message-ID: <18119:Dec1809:38:3990@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Date: 18 Dec 90 09:38:39 GMT
References: <2806@cirrusl.UUCP> <8432:Dec1622:40:0790@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <2809@cirrusl.UUCP>
Organization: IR
Lines: 18

In article <2809@cirrusl.UUCP> dhesi%cirrusl@oliveb.ATC.olivetti.com (Rahul Dhesi) writes:
> In <8432:Dec1622:40:0790@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
> brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
>    I want to make sure that blocks 17 through 22 (expressed in byte
>    sizes) will be guaranteed not to run out of space when I write to
>    them. You're saying that I should have no way to make this
>    guarantee.
> Well, "df" works nicely.

Is ``reliability'' a dead concept?

What do you propose I do if the disk has just a bit more memory than I
need? df works nicely only if the system does not, in fact, run out of
space, and then I might as well not bother checking.

Do you write software this way?

---Dan