From owner-freebsd-bugs Thu Nov 2 01:11:24 1995 Return-Path: owner-bugs Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id BAA22814 for bugs-outgoing; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 01:11:24 -0800 Received: from irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de (irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de [141.76.1.11]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id BAA22802 for ; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 01:11:19 -0800 Received: from sax.sax.de by irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de (8.6.12/8.6.12-s1) with ESMTP id KAA26788; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 10:10:48 +0100 Received: by sax.sax.de (8.6.11/8.6.12-s1) with UUCP id KAA07952; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 10:10:48 +0100 Received: (from j@localhost) by uriah.heep.sax.de (8.6.12/8.6.9) id KAA20485; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 10:09:54 +0100 From: J Wunsch Message-Id: <199511020909.KAA20485@uriah.heep.sax.de> Subject: Re: misc/804: fdformat - patch to add DOS-filsystem To: ah@alvman.RoBIN.de Date: Thu, 2 Nov 1995 10:09:54 +0100 (MET) Cc: freebsd-bugs@freefall.freebsd.org Reply-To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch) In-Reply-To: <199511020750.XAA20206@freefall.freebsd.org> from "Andreas Haakh" at Nov 1, 95 11:50:03 pm X-Phone: +49-351-2012 669 X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Length: 1889 Sender: owner-bugs@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk As Andreas Haakh wrote: > > Well, the situation was the following: I needed an MSDOS floppy and > I had both of my computers running FreeBSD (one is FreeBSD-server, the > other usually runs OS/2 and from time to time FreeBSD if needed). I > usually don't need the mtools and I don't have them installed. ... > Mformat is part of mtools and whoever needs them will install them. > Others will use mount_msdos if necessary and appreciate the addition > to fdformat. I'd rather stick with Bruce's argumentation here: mkdosfs (or newdosfs) should become a standard part of the distribution. We do have a newfs (aka. mkufs), an (rather unrelated, since rarely used) mkisofs, so there's no reason why some other major file system that is supported should not be supported by an mkdosfs (or mkfatfs?). Ideally, one would also like to get a fsckfatfs, but that's arguably too much work for too less use. > I persomally dislike mformat because it only supplies the other half > of a 'real MSDOS-format' the creation of the filesystem. But that's just a matter of *your* personal taste. Other people see the line drawn between both as entirely logical. Note that the format command in MSDOS starting at DOS 6 is also only a high-level format command when used without any option, and it's also only a high-level format command when applied to hard disks. I think your contribution does also miss the boot code itself, i.e., sticking such a floppy into the drive and attempting to boot it will result in a catastrophic failure (a jump to no-where land is sitting right in front of the BPB), instead of providing a useful hint that the disk doesn't contain a bootable system. 'tschuldigung für's Auf-Dir-Rumhacken. :) -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)