Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 10:22:50 -0700 From: Kirk McKusick <mckusick@mckusick.com> To: Robert Millan <rmh@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Compatibility options for mount(8) Message-ID: <201307111722.r6BHMohd099772@chez.mckusick.com> In-Reply-To: <CAOfDtXM320Ca2vJ0tD7d8Oi1DWCDSwDXheeJSeuULQ_Gboia6g@mail.gmail.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 12:24:36 +0200 > Subject: Re: Compatibility options for mount(8) > From: Robert Millan <rmh@freebsd.org> > To: Jaakko Heinonen <jh@freebsd.org> > Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org > > 2013/7/10 Jaakko Heinonen <jh@freebsd.org>: >> I am not sure if mount(8) is the right place for the translation. This >> seems to be the first string option translated by mount(8). The "rdonly" >> compatibility option is translated to "ro" in kernel. Looks inconsistent >> to me. > > Makes sense... > > I can look this part up later. For now, how about only adding -n? Is > everyone fine with that? > > See attachment. I am fine with your proposed addition. I would favor changing the manual page from +For compatibility with some other implementations; this flag is to +For compatibility with some Linux implementations; this flag is as it is (primarily) Linux compatibility and also reflects the comment that you have added in the code. Kirk McKusickhome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201307111722.r6BHMohd099772>