Date: Tue, 18 Apr 95 20:31 CDT From: uhclem@nemesis.lonestar.org (Frank Durda IV) To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Cc: uhclem@nemesis.lonestar.org Subject: No lost+found - offer a substitute? Message-ID: <m0s1OcG-0004vtC@nemesis.lonestar.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[0][ ... lost+found not created by default ... ] [1]Time to add the appropriate part to newfs(8)? [2]I asked Kirk about this and he said "no". I might still have the [2] email around somewhere. [3]I still think his arguments are only valid for the log structured FS. Ok, how about changing fsck to offer to use /tmp (or some other directory) in place of lost+found if it can't create lost+found? There is a precedence for fsck asking for something other than Y/N input. I remember older systems asking for the name of a device for writing a scratch file. I've had to rename tmp into lost+found with a filesystem zapper more than once to avoid losing something important after a bad crash when lost+found was one of the things that was wiped. Since then, every site I touch gets lost+found and a lost-found directories (just in case). Frank Durda IV <uhclem@nemesis.lonestar.org>|"The Knights who say "LETNi" or uhclem%nemesis@fw.ast.com (Fastest Route)| demand... A SEGMENT REGISTER!!!" ...letni!rwsys!nemesis!uhclem |"A what?" ...decvax!fw.ast.com!nemesis!uhclem |"LETNi! LETNi! LETNi!" - 1983
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?m0s1OcG-0004vtC>