Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!cbmvax!andy
From: andy@cbmvax.UUCP (Andy Finkel)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Why is there a mount but no unmount?
Message-ID: <3631@cbmvax.UUCP>
Date: 14 Apr 88 16:36:41 GMT
References: <4643@garfield.UUCP> <242@ssbell.UUCP> <2810@tekigm2.TEK.COM> <1823@sugar.UUCP>
Reply-To: andy@cbmvax.UUCP (Andy Finkel)
Organization: Commodore Technology, West Chester, PA
Lines: 30
Keywords: mount unmount path

In article <1823@sugar.UUCP> peter@sugar.UUCP (Peter da Silva) writes:
>In article ... phils@tekigm2.TEK.COM (Philip E Staub) writes:
>> In article <242@ssbell.UUCP> chris@ssbell.UUCP (0000-Chris Olson) writes:
>> >Does anyone out there know of any GOOD reason that commodore
>> >forgot to supply an unmount command to go with the mount?
>
>You don't. Just as you can't remove a file that's got locks on it, you don't
>let anyone unmount a device that's got locks on.
>
>It seems to work fine for UNIX.

Yes this should work fine for AmigaDOS as well.  However, this isn't
the problem.  It's resource tracking again.  Only the handler
itself knows what resources it has locked down, that should be
returned to the system when the handler is unmounted.  

The solution might be to implement the ACTION_DIE packet in all
existing handlers.

We'll keep this in mind for the future, ok ?

			andy
-- 
andy finkel		{ihnp4|seismo|allegra}!cbmvax!andy 
Commodore-Amiga, Inc.

"Never test for an error condition you don't know how to handle."
		
Any expressed opinions are mine; but feel free to share.
I disclaim all responsibilities, all shapes, all sizes, all colors.