Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 13:18:16 +0100 From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> Cc: jkh@zippy.cdrom.com, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: I almost hate to suggest this... Message-ID: <36644.914069896@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 19 Dec 1998 23:10:08 %2B1100." <199812191210.XAA06347@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <199812191210.XAA06347@godzilla.zeta.org.au>, Bruce Evans writes: >>> mount_foo should almost never be used directly. It should be in /libexec >> >>Then why have mount_foo at all? > >So that mount(8) is easy to extend. So that you don't get a spagetti program (like for instance ifconfig) which needs to know about all sorts of weird filesystems ideosyncracies. In difference from Bruce I think that mount_XXX is the primary interface, (and as such agree with jordan that mount_ufs should be there). Mount is just a backwards compatibility gadget now. -- Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member phk@FreeBSD.ORG "Real hackers run -current on their laptop." "ttyv0" -- What UNIX calls a $20K state-of-the-art, 3D, hi-res color terminal To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?36644.914069896>