From owner-freebsd-current Sat Sep 29 17:31:40 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from w250.z064001178.sjc-ca.dsl.cnc.net (w250.z064001178.sjc-ca.dsl.cnc.net [64.1.178.250]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9D99637B406 for ; Sat, 29 Sep 2001 17:31:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 1808 invoked by uid 1000); 30 Sep 2001 00:31:58 -0000 Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2001 17:31:36 -0700 From: Jos Backus To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: mdmfs mount_mfs compatibility bug? Message-ID: <20010929173136.F629@lizzy.bugworks.com> Reply-To: Jos Backus Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org References: <200109300112.aa88479@salmon.maths.tcd.ie>; <20010930002525.0255D3E04@bazooka.trit.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20010930002525.0255D3E04@bazooka.trit.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sat, Sep 29, 2001 at 05:25:20PM -0700, Dima Dorfman wrote: > The problem with this is that in a bikeshed far, far in the past, some > people wanted to me able to call it "mount_md" instead of "mount_mfs". Hardcoding the fsname may not be terribly elegant but does work. > Of course, we could allow "mfs" and "md", but that seems rather ugly > (what if someone wants "fish"?). I'd rather see mount(8) use > mount_xxx, although if we think that would break something, your patch > is probably the best solution. Fwiw, agreed on both counts. Thanks Ian, for providing the (temporary?) fix. -- Jos Backus _/ _/_/_/ Santa Clara, CA _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ josb@cncdsl.com _/_/ _/_/_/ use Std::Disclaimer; To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message