From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 22133 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2020 04:43:53 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (45.79.103.53) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 6 Jul 2020 04:43:53 -0000 Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 4CFB59C736; Mon, 6 Jul 2020 14:43:48 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9E4B94588; Mon, 6 Jul 2020 14:43:04 +1000 (AEST) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 6BC1D94588; Mon, 6 Jul 2020 14:42:46 +1000 (AEST) Received: from viclamta35p.bpe.bigpond.com (viclamta35p.bpe.bigpond.com [203.38.21.99]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6B67693D46 for ; Mon, 6 Jul 2020 14:42:45 +1000 (AEST) Received: from smtp.telstra.com ([10.10.26.4]) by viclafep35p-svc.bpe.nexus.telstra.com.au with ESMTP id <20200706044243.WJXS7261.viclafep35p-svc.bpe.nexus.telstra.com.au@smtp.telstra.com> for ; Mon, 6 Jul 2020 14:42:43 +1000 X-RG-Spam: Unknown X-RazorGate-Vade: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduiedruddvgdekgecutefuodetggdotefrodftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfupfevtfgpvffgnffuvffttedpqfgfvfenuceurghilhhouhhtmecugedttdenucenucfjughrpeffhffvufgjkfhffgggtgesthdttddttdervdenucfhrhhomhepffgrvhgvucfjohhrshhfrghllhcuoegurghvvgeshhhorhhsfhgrlhhlrdhorhhgqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeekieetjeeuuefhfeeguedvudeifeevudfgvedtffekhfffjeekhfdutdetheethfenucfkphepuddutddrudeguddrudelfedrvdeffeenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhephhgvlhhopegrnhgvuhhrihhnrdhhohhrshhfrghllhdrohhrghdpihhnvghtpeduuddtrddugedurdduleefrddvfeefpdhmrghilhhfrhhomhepoegurghvvgeshhhorhhsfhgrlhhlrdhorhhgqedprhgtphhtthhopeeothhuhhhssehtuhhhshdrohhrgheq X-RazorGate-Vade-Verdict: clean 0 X-RazorGate-Vade-Classification: clean X-RG-VS-CLASS: clean Received: from aneurin.horsfall.org (110.141.193.233) by smtp.telstra.com (5.8.420) id 5F020FEA0016FADD for tuhs@tuhs.org; Mon, 6 Jul 2020 14:42:42 +1000 Received: from aneurin.horsfall.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by aneurin.horsfall.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 0664ggmO025749 for ; Mon, 6 Jul 2020 14:42:42 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from dave@horsfall.org) Received: from localhost (dave@localhost) by aneurin.horsfall.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) with ESMTP id 0664gf6J025746 for ; Mon, 6 Jul 2020 14:42:42 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from dave@horsfall.org) X-Authentication-Warning: aneurin.horsfall.org: dave owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2020 14:42:41 +1000 (EST) From: Dave Horsfall To: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society In-Reply-To: <20200705001609.GO29318@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: References: <4FC7FA55-5035-41A2-B52F-AE26DC8BED2C@planet.nl> <20200623140124.GR22291@mcvoy.com> <20200624193647.GB14302@mcvoy.com> <20200705001609.GO29318@mcvoy.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21.9999 (BSF 287 2018-06-16) X-GPG-Public-Key: http://www.horsfall.org/gpgkey.pub X-GPG-Fingerprint: 05B4 FFBC 0218 B438 66E0 587B EF46 7357 EF5E F58B X-Home-Page: http://www.horsfall.org/ X-Witty-Saying: "chmod 666 the_mode_of_the_beast" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Subject: Re: [TUHS] VFS prior to 1984 X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" On Sat, 4 Jul 2020, Larry McVoy wrote: >> Aren't holes part of the file system semantics? > > I'm not talking about legit holes, I'm talking about where your data > used be served up as a list of zeros. Ah; my mistake... Too much blood in my coffee stream. > The SCCS checksum is weak but kinda handy. You could see single bit > errors with it (at least you could in BitKeeper). [...] I used to edit SCCS files if I stuffed up an update (and didn't want to make another update); I discovered that if I zeroed the checksum then it would be recalculated... I have no idea what happened should the "genuine" checksum turn out to be zero. -- Dave