Date: 01 Mar 2001 14:30:30 +0100 From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org> To: Dima Dorfman <dima@unixfreak.org> Cc: audit@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Propagating the nodump flag Message-ID: <xzpofvl62h5.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> In-Reply-To: Dima Dorfman's message of "Wed, 28 Feb 2001 20:12:34 -0800" References: <20010301041234.9F3D63E09@bazooka.unixfreak.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dima Dorfman <dima@unixfreak.org> writes: > Attached below is a port of NetBSD's patch to FreeBSD's dump(8). The > patch is probably more complex than it should have been due to dump's > obscure tree-walker. For the technical details of what it does, see: > http://lists.openresources.com/NetBSD/tech-kern/msg00453.html (note > that the patch there is not identical to the one below, and should not > be used; the reference is provided for its excellent technical > explanation of the patch). 1) does our dump(8) have useful functionality that NetBSD's doesn't? 2) does NetBSD's dump(8) have useful functionality that ours doesn't? If the answers to these questions are "no" and "yes" respectively, as I suspect they may be, we should just replace our dump(8) with NetBSD's. If the answers are "yes" and "yes", we should merge evrything NetBSD's dump(8) does that ours doesn't into our dump(8) and strive to keep the diffs between the two as small as possible. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-audit" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?xzpofvl62h5.fsf>