Hello Norman On 09.09.20 17:17, Norman Feske wrote: > the behavior is the result of a combination of two things [...]
Thanks for the clarification. The question came up (but is only loosely coupled) with the implementation and testing of file system watch for `lx_fs`. > I think that both points are quite reasonable. Or the other way around, > I wonder what would be a sensible alternative? Intuitively, I would have expected that `fs_rom` always provides the content of the file with the configured file name. If there's no file with that name anymore (because it has been moved or deleted), the ROM would be empty until there is the same (moved back), or another file with the specified file name. It more or less boils down to the question whether `fs_rom` is "bound" to a file name or a file handle. But I guess the later is the more generally applicable (and agreed upon) definition - which is fine with me ;) Cheers, Roman
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Genode users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.genode.org/listinfo/users
