[Info-vax] Request description of UFS for VMS person

[Bob Eager]

On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 12:37:23 UTC, 
koehler at eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote:

> In article <176uZD2KcidF-pn2-uSusmdQq9Df8 at rikki.tavi.co.uk>, "Bob Eager" <rde42 at spamcop.net> writes:
> > 
> > I needed to use it a couple of times in the early days (33 years ago) 
> > but not since. My point in mentioning 'clri' is that someone here 
> > thought that functionality was essential on VMS to tidy up a borked 
> > directory, and (by implication) that 'Unix' was broken if it couldn't do
> > it. In practice, it seems that VMS *needs* it and Unix doesn't.
> 
>    Nobody said UNIX was broken if it couldn't do it.  The question was
>    why VMS has it, and an answer was given.  It was pointed out that
>    other OS needed some way to recover from the same situation (a
>    corrupt disctory), but no claim was made as to how that had to be
>    implemented.

Nobody said VMS was broken! The VMS file system has many advantages. I 
merely pointed out that ffs, at any rate, didn't seem to need a way to 
recover from that situation.

-- 
Bob Eager