From f62dc8e2942ada3d3dd6a257f3d710cbd8064659 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "http://nullroute.eu.org/~grawity/" Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2013 12:52:27 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Added a comment --- ...comment_1_b1aa185734c3d74830b81def4fe63bff._comment | 10 ++++++++++ 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/devblog/day_74__so_close/comment_1_b1aa185734c3d74830b81def4fe63bff._comment diff --git a/doc/devblog/day_74__so_close/comment_1_b1aa185734c3d74830b81def4fe63bff._comment b/doc/devblog/day_74__so_close/comment_1_b1aa185734c3d74830b81def4fe63bff._comment new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..2abbc8dd33 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/devblog/day_74__so_close/comment_1_b1aa185734c3d74830b81def4fe63bff._comment @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ +[[!comment format=mdwn + username="http://nullroute.eu.org/~grawity/" + nickname="Mantas" + subject="comment 1" + date="2013-12-08T12:52:26Z" + content=""" +Take a look at how Process Hacker implements the \"Search for open handles\" function; it is rather close to `lsof`. (Unlocker probably does it the same way, too.) + +But locking (e.g. I think the \"share mode\" could prevent other programs from writing but not reading) may be more reliable, if a program starts writing to file *after* the lsof check happens... +"""]]