Date: Fri, 03 Nov 1995 10:45:51 +0100 From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.tfs.com> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> Cc: Jeffrey Hsu <hsu@freefall.freebsd.org>, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: More nits Message-ID: <1876.815391951@critter.tfs.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 02 Nov 1995 11:00:16 PST." <11965.815338816@time.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Rather than yet another non-standard option, how about using the heuristic > > that if a filesystem doesn't have to be fsck'ed, it's okay for the > > mount to fail? The theory being that a fs which must be fsck'ed is more > > critical than one which does not. Both the CDROM filesystems and the DOS > > filesystems fit this heuristic. > > That would leave any critical NFS filesystems to slip through the cracks. > > I think David's right - another keyword is the way to go (but if nobody's > going to ADD this keyword, I propose we do the rc hack I suggested! :-) I also belive we need the "optional" keyword. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | phk@FreeBSD.ORG FreeBSD Core-team. http://www.freebsd.org/~phk | phk@login.dknet.dk Private mailbox. whois: [PHK] | phk@ref.tfs.com TRW Financial Systems, Inc. Future will arrive by its own means, progress not so.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1876.815391951>