From owner-freebsd-current Sat May 16 14:33:55 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA10418 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Sat, 16 May 1998 14:33:55 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from frmug.org (frmug-gw.frmug.org [193.56.58.252]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA10315 for ; Sat, 16 May 1998 14:33:43 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from roberto@keltia.freenix.fr) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by frmug.org (8.9.0.Beta7/frmug-2.3/nospam) with UUCP id XAA04735 for current@FreeBSD.ORG; Sat, 16 May 1998 23:33:31 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from roberto@keltia.freenix.fr) Received: (from roberto@localhost) by keltia.freenix.fr (8.9.0.Beta4/keltia-2.14/nospam) id WAA06089 for current@FreeBSD.ORG; Sat, 16 May 1998 22:57:40 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from roberto) Message-ID: <19980516225740.A6032@keltia.freenix.fr> Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 22:57:40 +0200 From: Ollivier Robert To: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Soft update vs noatime Mail-Followup-To: current@FreeBSD.ORG References: <354E9212.500F9F30@whistle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.92.3i In-Reply-To: ; from Bob Bishop on Sat, May 16, 1998 at 10:42:50AM +0100 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 3.0-CURRENT ctm#4293 AMD-K6 MMX @ 225 MHz Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG According to Bob Bishop: > Is there any reason not to use noatime with soft updates? No reason except that it doesn't seem to be useful (in my tests of "cvs co" & "rm" anyway). -- Ollivier ROBERT -=- FreeBSD: The Power to Serve! -=- roberto@keltia.freenix.fr FreeBSD keltia.freenix.fr 3.0-CURRENT #59: Wed May 6 00:22:36 CEST 1998 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message