Date: Wed, 23 Aug 95 13:39:38 MDT From: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert) To: rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com (Rodney W. Grimes) Cc: jkh@time.cdrom.com, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Recent mount patches.. Message-ID: <9508231939.AA05078@cs.weber.edu> In-Reply-To: <199508231845.LAA10129@gndrsh.aac.dev.com> from "Rodney W. Grimes" at Aug 23, 95 11:45:56 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > > > > You'll need to rebuild all your mount_foo execs due to the change in > > > mount.h. Just FYI. > > > > > > I decided to take the patch because I myself am tired of the system > > > refusing to come up just because I don't have a CD in the drive, yet > > > it's silly to have to type the whole mount command spec in as the > > > only alternative. > > > > What did you change in mount.h? > > > > This is probably suboptimal... > > Bug #1, the include file sys/mount.h is a kernel interface definition file, > the kernel has no need, nor does it care about -noall (currently bug #2 > caused this to be missnamed -noauto). > > Bug #3 (not related to patch) -a is undocumented in the man page, it > is listed in the SYNOPSIS section though, and referenced at least once > in the man page in an example. You didn't identify what you were responding to... this isn't a list of changes -- can I gather that this is a list of what you see as bugs in the changes? I assume this supports the contention that mount.h changes are not necessary to provide the described behaviour? Terry Lambert terry@cs.weber.edu --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9508231939.AA05078>