From owner-freebsd-arch  Thu Mar 29 21:47:37 2001
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from beastie.mckusick.com (beastie.mckusick.com [209.31.233.184])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C63237B718
	for <arch@FreeBSD.ORG>; Thu, 29 Mar 2001 21:47:35 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from mckusick@mckusick.com)
Received: from beastie.mckusick.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by beastie.mckusick.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA09139;
	Thu, 29 Mar 2001 21:47:32 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from mckusick@beastie.mckusick.com)
Message-Id: <200103300547.VAA09139@beastie.mckusick.com>
To: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>
Subject: Re: Background Fsck 
Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 29 Mar 2001 21:30:29 PST."
             <20010329213029.T9431@fw.wintelcom.net> 
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 21:47:32 -0800
From: Kirk McKusick <mckusick@mckusick.com>
Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

	Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 21:30:29 -0800
	From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>
	To: Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net>
	Cc: Kirk McKusick <mckusick@mckusick.com>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG
	Subject: Re: Background Fsck

	* Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net> [010329 21:14] wrote:
	> On Thu, Mar 29, 2001 at 08:20:30PM -0800, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
	> > Well, even though most common sense says not to make a giant /,
	> > people still do this, especially people coming from Linux.
	> > 
	> > It would be good to be able to background check if at all possible.
	> 
	> Wouldn't just moving it to pass 2 take care of that?

	I don't know.

	I'm saying that if there's something in here that makes doing on
	/ not possible because of Kirk's preference (even though it's
	technically possible) I hope he reconsiders.

	If it's not technically possible then we'll live with it.

	-- 
	-Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org]
	Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology,"
	start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.

Background checking the root is possible. The only reason to exclude
it was because people are not yet comfortable with entrusting their
root to a background check. Since most roots are small, the foreground
fsck time is minimal. It would be possible to make background chacking
of the root happen by default and have the administrator add the `F'
flag to the passno if they wanted to force a background check.

	Kirk

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message