Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 5th May 2008 21:00 UTC

Thread beginning with comment 313115
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Locking still necessary
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 6th May 2008 17:00
in reply to "RE[2]: Locking still necessary"
Doesn't every program need a unique identifier?
How do you make sure that no two programs can have the same identifier if everybody can set up a server and name/tag the apps as he pleases?
How do you make sure that no two programs can have the same identifier if everybody can set up a server and name/tag the apps as he pleases?
They're not identifiers, they're values stored as an attribute. Even if you have ten billion million attributes with value 345, if they belong to different files, that simply doesn't matter.
RE[4]: Locking still necessary
by RandomGuy on Tue 6th May 2008 21:36
in reply to "RE[3]: Locking still necessary"
Maybe I just misunderstand what you say but aren't all these attributes together sort of an identifier?
So you could have two files with attributes
program=paint
vendor=ms
version=4.1
patch_level=127
...
and if they contained different binaries it would be a big problem. You could, of course, add mechanisms like checksumming the binaries and so on.
But then again you'd need a central server/group of servers that tell the user that a program with attributes x and y should have checksum z.
Am I missing something?
Member since:
2006-07-30
Doesn't every program need a unique identifier?
How do you make sure that no two programs can have the same identifier if everybody can set up a server and name/tag the apps as he pleases?