From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Roman V. Shaposhnick" To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] Attach/Auth Message-ID: <20020830065825.A7054@unicorn.math.spbu.ru> References: <4698e86778a916250d33161faf74d405@plan9.bell-labs.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <4698e86778a916250d33161faf74d405@plan9.bell-labs.com> Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 06:58:25 +0400 Topicbox-Message-UUID: e1d01010-eaca-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 On Wed, Aug 28, 2002 at 06:45:02AM -0400, Russ Cox wrote: > > Russ, can you also add something to the effect of "fids can be dangling" > > to the 9P manpages ? May be I'm being too picky, but I have a good reason -- > > I've learned that in a pretty hard way. > > what forsyth said. also, fids can dangle in the sense that if you > don't take care of closing all of them, there will just be > garbage in memory but the fid table bookkeeping stays correct. > i hope that's not what you mean, though. You're right. That's not what I meant. > can you rephrase that? Sure. I just asked to mention that fid doesn't guarantee you that resource it points to will be available for the next operation. You may get Ephase. The reason I was asking to add this to the 9P manpages is that fids are very similar to object handles and most of the time people expect handles to stay valid until explicitly released ( clunked ). Thanks, Roman.