From owner-freebsd-current Sat Feb 1 09:51:55 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA01827 for current-outgoing; Sat, 1 Feb 1997 09:51:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from sax.sax.de (sax.sax.de [193.175.26.33]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id JAA01821 for ; Sat, 1 Feb 1997 09:51:52 -0800 (PST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by sax.sax.de (8.6.12/8.6.12-s1) with UUCP id SAA10604 for freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG; Sat, 1 Feb 1997 18:51:44 +0100 Received: (from j@localhost) by uriah.heep.sax.de (8.8.5/8.6.9) id SAA29356; Sat, 1 Feb 1997 18:42:09 +0100 (MET) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 18:42:08 +0100 From: j@uriah.heep.sax.de (J Wunsch) To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG (FreeBSD-current users) Subject: Re: Good name for a dump(8) option? References: <19234.854813398@time.cdrom.com> X-Mailer: Mutt 0.55-PL10 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Phone: +49-351-2012 669 X-PGP-Fingerprint: DC 47 E6 E4 FF A6 E9 8F 93 21 E0 7D F9 12 D6 4E Reply-To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch) In-Reply-To: ; from Michael Reifenberger on Feb 1, 1997 18:12:34 +0100 Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk As Michael Reifenberger wrote: > > How about a tape length of -1 for the existing option? :-) > > Wouldn't the -1 cause YetAnotherOption? > Should't it be a size of 0 instead? I think i tried to use this approach first, but eventually gave up since it would have required revamping the entire logic. So either we can settle for an option, or i'm not willing to do the work. (Note that i've got these changes ready to commit already, and run them locally for quite some time now. I'm not asking for more work. :-) -- 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. ;-)