Subject: Re: procfs?
To: None <>
From: Frank van der Linden <>
List: current-users
Date: 01/09/1994 20:32:39
My procfs problem has been solved, I did indeed miss some files (I relied
on scan.current to find out which files I had missed through the CVS updates,
but apparently the scan was done just when the files were being committed
or something like that).

Anyway.. yes, I know: relying on CVS update messages is a Bad Thing. However,
for someone not able to sup (though that hopefully changes in the near future),
it beats ftp-ing the complete set of tarfiles each time. And an occasional
check into the scan.current to get missed files has worked ok so far. But:
if the CVS update messages are unreliable (which they are), do they still
serve any purpose? There has been talk about making a set of diffs. Maybe
a scan could be run on sun-lamp, that leaves a timestamp somewhere when
it is finished, and always reports all new files since the last timestamp
(a modified supscan, I guess).

- Frank