Norton Utilities vs. "the way things are"

[Daniel A. Graifer]

In article <465 at bria> uunet!bria!mike writes:
>[quotation deleted]
>I thought I made myself rather clear on this point.  My objection is
>the fact that NU implements undeletion in the kernel by "patching" 
>(read: molesting) it. 
>
>I stated that I would like to see kernel support for file undeletion.
>When I say kernel support, I mean as being a fundamental part of the 
>filesystem code, not a hack applied from the outside.  I certainly did
>_NOT_ state that I would like to see a bunch of migrant workers from 
>the DOS world fingering my operating system.
>[...]
>Cheers,
>-- 
>Michael Stefanik, MGI Inc., Los Angeles| Opinions stated are not even my own.
>Title of the week: Systems Engineer    | UUCP: ...!uunet!bria!mike
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Remember folks: If you can't flame MS-DOS, then what _can_ you flame?

Excuse me, but I think I sense some unwarrented assumptions
here.  I was under the impression that NU 'patched' the kernal
by providing a replacement '.o' and '.a' files.  I've seen
nothing in the recent discussion here to contradict this.  How
else would you provide an OS level enhancement?  Also, I
thought I heard that Norton either hired a new team, or
subcontracted the Unix version to somebody who HAD unix
expertise.  The Norton label may imply marketing, QA, and
support only.

As I see it, the standard unix filesystem divides the
filesystem into two pieces: Allocated & Free.  NU divides
it into Allocated and May-Be-Reallocated, and provides a
smart mechanism for determining the order of reuse.  Free
Space is still the amount of space in the later category.

Besides: Relax!  Nobody is asking YOU to buy it!

Dan
-- 
Daniel A. Graifer			Coastal Capital Funding Corp.
Sr. Vice President, Financial Systems	7900 Westpark Dr. Suite A-130
(703)821-3244				McLean, VA  22102
uunet!fciva!dag				fciva.FRANKCAP.COM!dag at uunet.uu.net