But it is a problem. And also a difference in philosophy. NTFS gives the user and the process the guarantee that the filesystem will remain consistent. Also as a user, I have a guarantee that the file I have open, represents a file that actually exists on the file system, and not a deleted file.
This is not relevant to the on-disk filesystem, just how the OS handles files.
The philosophy is also flawed: open a file, then create a hard link to it. You now can't delete that hard link (because the file is open), even though you just created it. This is not a problem on POSIX because it correctly distinguishes a file name (represented by a directory entry) from a file (represented by the inode).
Nothing like not being able to delete a directory because Explorer is keeping the folder's thumbnail database open and in use even though you are no longer in the directory.
Was there a problem installing Putty?
Yes. Putty.
Strange. I never had a problem with it 10 years ago. Perhaps our expectations for a terminal have changed in that time.
1 reply →
Putty's been being distributed over unsecured HTTP for years - I wouldn't be surprised if some companies' IT departments forbid it.
The main page [0] and main download [1] are HTTPS. GPG signatures are provided as well.
[0] https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/latest.ht...
[1] https://the.earth.li/~sgtatham/putty/latest/w64/putty-64bit-...
1 reply →
Downloading something over HTTPS doesn't magically make it secure.
I did out of irritation the nth time I wanted to delete a file that it insisted was open (which should not be a problem anyway).
>(which should not be a problem anyway).
But it is a problem. And also a difference in philosophy. NTFS gives the user and the process the guarantee that the filesystem will remain consistent. Also as a user, I have a guarantee that the file I have open, represents a file that actually exists on the file system, and not a deleted file.
This is not relevant to the on-disk filesystem, just how the OS handles files.
The philosophy is also flawed: open a file, then create a hard link to it. You now can't delete that hard link (because the file is open), even though you just created it. This is not a problem on POSIX because it correctly distinguishes a file name (represented by a directory entry) from a file (represented by the inode).
2 replies →
Nothing like not being able to delete a directory because Explorer is keeping the folder's thumbnail database open and in use even though you are no longer in the directory.
The case where you can actually know why is the best one. More often than not there is no obvious reason why the damn thing is open.