*shut
Malcolm Hussain-Gambles (1596) 811 posts |
If you drop to the command line and run *shut it completely fubars the networking stack. |
Rick Murray (539) 13840 posts |
I have a program called ListOpen that displays a list of open files, then in BASIC a quick CLOSE#xx. If it’d be a help to you, I could put together a command line program to do this in one go? |
Martin Bazley (331) 379 posts |
There are many, many programs which will deal with this problem for you properly. You should never, ever need to use *Shut. http://www.starfighter.acornarcade.com/mysite/utilities.htm#wimpdrain |
Tank (53) 375 posts |
I use an app called !ResRec written by Andrew Pullan (1999), but is seems to have disappeared off the interweb…. |
Malcolm Hussain-Gambles (1596) 811 posts |
Thanks guys, that’s great! |
Rick Murray (539) 13840 posts |
On the other hand, something that can’t cope with its files being closed ought to trap OS_Find and not allow this… |
Steve Pampling (1551) 8170 posts |
http://wayback.archive.org/web/20081202232700/http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/apullan/apps/index.html Somethings never truly go away. I like big libraries, particularly ones with proper books but this one has a fast index :-) |
Chris Evans (457) 1614 posts |
I think we use !CloseFiles. Though that only works locally. If I open a zip file on a remote machine using sharefs it can sometimes leave the file open. |
nemo (145) 2546 posts |
…in an ideal world. If everything always went according to plan and never went wrong. Meanwhile, on planet Earth… The corollary is that though it might break some applications, the OS itself should definitely be able to cope with using one of its own commands! This isn’t some third party hack, it’s a very long standing bit of functionality that always used to be benign. For example, the FontManager specifically copes with its files being closed. The network stack ought to too. |