Sender:	vheyndri AT rug DOT ac DOT be
Message-Id:	<3510CCA7.5849@rug.ac.be>
Date:	Thu, 19 Mar 1998 08:43:35 +0100
From:	Vik Heyndrickx <Vik DOT Heyndrickx AT rug DOT ac DOT be>
Mime-Version:	1.0
To:	Diego Zuccato <cssl AT geocities DOT com>
Cc:	Bill Currie <bill AT taniwha DOT tssc DOT co DOT nz>, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: Temporary files considered unsafe
References:	<199803182220 DOT OAA07638 AT geocities DOT com>

Diego Zuccato wrote:
> 
>  > Packing different values into an 8+3 filename is not really a problem
>  > (assuming that the information content of these values together is not
>  > larger than 39^8).
> Uhm... Note that 39^8 > 2^42
> So there can be up to 42 bit of info. Couldn't we use a 32bit PID and a
> 10 bit counter ?

I've said it before: The problem is that the PID has a high chance of
reusage after termination of a program and a restart. This means that
the same names will be produced by both programs, and depending upon how
many temporary files a program needs this may become a problem or not.
A 10 bit counter seems enough, but when these ten bits also have to
contain a time component that may be too narrow.

-- 
 \ Vik /-_-_-_-_-_-_/   
  \___/ Heyndrickx /          
   \ /-_-_-_-_-_-_/

- Raw text -