From owner-cvs-all Fri Feb 2 20:49:41 2001 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from guru.mired.org (okc-65-26-235-186.mmcable.com [65.26.235.186]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E6C1737B401 for ; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 20:49:23 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 47049 invoked by uid 100); 3 Feb 2001 04:49:22 -0000 From: Mike Meyer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <14971.36306.550056.3968@guru.mired.org> Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 22:49:22 -0600 (CST) To: Dima Dorfman Cc: cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: mdconfig config file (was: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/conf GENERI C) In-Reply-To: <10389756@toto.iv> X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under 21.1 (patch 10) "Capitol Reef" XEmacs Lucid X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Dima Dorfman types: > > := Why not write a 'mount_md' program to do all the magic based on fstab > > := options, similar to what mount_mfs used to do for MFS? A 'mount_md' > > := would give us instant integration into existing kernel mechanisms, > > := including startup (/etc/rc) mechanisms. > > : > > > > > (this whole thing is predicated on someone writing a mount_md wrapper > > for MD that mimics the options mount_mfs accepts, for compatibility). > > I'll do it. Would it be safe to assume that it's acceptable to write > a C program to parse the arguments, build command lines to > appropriately invoke disklabel, newfs, maybe tunefs, and mount, then > call system(3) to execute them? If you're going to use system on them all, why not just use Perl or a shell script and getopts? The only thing that's really painful in this process (at least now that the hard work has been done) newfs. This suggests that, instead of a new program, making newfs do duty as mount_md - similar to the way it does mount_mfs now - might be the way to do it. That leaves out the tunefs functionality, which begs the question - why doesn't newfs have (at least some of) tunefs functionality now? I, for one, would like to be able to enable soft updates on a file system when it's created. http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message