Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cbmvax!andy
From: andy@cbmvax.UUCP (Andy Finkel)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: Faster File Systems
Keywords: BOOH
Message-ID: <5518@cbmvax.UUCP>
Date: 16 Dec 88 17:59:10 GMT
References: <65@microsoft.UUCP> <23498@sgi.SGI.COM> <85@microsoft.UUCP>
Reply-To: andy@cbmvax.UUCP (Andy Finkel)
Organization: Commodore Technology, West Chester, PA
Lines: 25

In article <85@microsoft.UUCP> w-colinp@microsoft.UUCP (Colin Plumb) writes:
>Finally, question for C-A: will WB 1.4 support variable-sized lock structs?
>If so, I might find it easier to use them now, not work with this WB, and
>just wait for 1.4.  It's unlikely to get out of the CLI-bigot community
>before then, anyway.

Workbench 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3 support variable sized locks.  Locks
are allocated by the filesystem.  Programs ask for them, ask the
file system to duplicate them, free them, etc.  So, yes, variable
sized locks are supported, as long as you maintain the 5 initial
documented fields.  (6 if you count that your lock should be
allocated the way DOS likes to see memory, ie a size on the beginning)

(The ram-handler uses larger than standard locks, btw, so I'm
fairly sure you can extend them :-)  )

-- 
andy finkel		{uunet|rutgers|amiga}!cbmvax!andy
Commodore-Amiga, Inc.

"Possibly this is a new usage of the word 'compatible' with which
 I was previously unfamiliar"

Any expressed opinions are mine; but feel free to share.
I disclaim all responsibilities, all shapes, all sizes, all colors.