[sldev] "Unreferenced" assets

[Sean Lynch]

Absolutely! The way we've been testing this is to just move assets we
*would* delete into another pile and then watch to see if anything gets
requested from this pile. This is how GC will be tested for the first
several passes as well, until we're sure it's catching everything that's
still "treasure."

On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 4:08 AM, Argent Stonecutter <secret.argent at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On 2008-05-19, at 17:10, Sean Lynch wrote:
>
>> GC is the only way assets will get deleted (other than single reference
>> assets like scripted attachments, but that code is not in production yet),
>>
>
> o_O
>
> Please be very very careful.
>
> Attachments are already kind of fragile and a frequent source of inventory
> loss as it is.
>
>  so yes in any case that llGiveInventory needs to make a new asset, but I
>> believe that unless you're giving a no-copy object, a new asset isn't
>> created by llGiveInventory, just a new reference to the existing asset.
>>
>
> Even modifiable assets like boxes?
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/sldev/attachments/20080520/dbddb938/attachment.htm