[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Default number of overwrites in shred
From: |
John Cowan |
Subject: |
Re: Default number of overwrites in shred |
Date: |
Fri, 4 May 2007 10:28:13 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) |
Jim Meyering scripsit:
> My reflex was to object. Reducing the default number of passes from
> 25 to 1 seemed extreme. But after skimming through the link below,
> it's hard to argue :-)
Still, there may be older disks hanging about. How about making the
number of passes inversely proportional to the log of the size of
the disk? That will smoothly accommodate older disks with wide
recording tracks as well as newer ones with narrow tracks.
--
How they ever reached any conclusion at all <address@hidden>
is starkly unknowable to the human mind. http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
--"Backstage Lensman", Randall Garrett
- Re: Default number of overwrites in shred, (continued)
- Re: Default number of overwrites in shred, Jim Meyering, 2007/05/04
- Re: Default number of overwrites in shred, Peter Eckersley, 2007/05/04
- Re: Default number of overwrites in shred, Jim Meyering, 2007/05/04
- Re: Default number of overwrites in shred, Paul Eggert, 2007/05/04
- Re: Default number of overwrites in shred, Jim Meyering, 2007/05/04
- Re: Default number of overwrites in shred, Peter Eckersley, 2007/05/04
- Re: Default number of overwrites in shred, Philip Rowlands, 2007/05/05
- Re: Default number of overwrites in shred, Pádraig Brady, 2007/05/06
- Re: Default number of overwrites in shred, Paul Eggert, 2007/05/08
- Re: Default number of overwrites in shred,
John Cowan <=
- Re: Default number of overwrites in shred, Peter Eckersley, 2007/05/04