From owner-freebsd-current Sat May 16 02:51:21 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA20229 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Sat, 16 May 1998 02:51:21 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from isbalham.ist.co.uk (isbalham.ist.co.uk [192.31.26.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id CAA20224 for ; Sat, 16 May 1998 02:51:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rb@gid.co.uk) Received: from gid.co.uk (uucp@localhost) by isbalham.ist.co.uk (8.8.7/8.8.4) with UUCP id KAA21487; Sat, 16 May 1998 10:50:24 +0100 (BST) Received: from [194.32.164.2] by seagoon.gid.co.uk; Sat, 16 May 1998 10:38:02 +0100 (BST) X-Sender: rb@194.32.164.1 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <354E9212.500F9F30@whistle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 10:42:50 +0100 To: Julian Elischer From: Bob Bishop Subject: Soft update vs noatime Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Hi, Is there any reason not to use noatime with soft updates? -- Bob Bishop (0118) 977 4017 international code +44 118 rb@gid.co.uk fax (0118) 989 4254 between 0800 and 1800 UK To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message