From owner-freebsd-hackers  Tue Mar 25 14:12:44 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id OAA14160
          for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 25 Mar 1997 14:12:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.50])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id OAA14152
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Tue, 25 Mar 1997 14:12:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id OAA25877; Tue, 25 Mar 1997 14:58:43 -0700
From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
Message-Id: <199703252158.OAA25877@phaeton.artisoft.com>
Subject: Re: dump for MS-DOS partitions.
To: thorpej@nas.nasa.gov
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 14:58:43 -0700 (MST)
Cc: terry@lambert.org, joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de, hackers@freebsd.org,
        port-i386@netbsd.org, darrenr@cyber.com.au
In-Reply-To: <199703250159.RAA11475@lestat.nas.nasa.gov> from "Jason Thorpe" at Mar 24, 97 05:59:25 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>  > Curious: why aren't they using it as a prefix instead of a suffix?  It
>  > would seem to make more sense as a prefix, for all sorts fo string
>  > manipulation reasons, including argv[ 0] and _ replacement with 0
>  > for string split issues...
>  > 
>  > Is it just that SVR4 does it with prefixes, and NIH rules?
> 
> ....there was already a (weak) precendent in BSD for suffixes... c.f.
> "newlfs".
> 
> Of course, I don't recall checking what SVR4 did, either.  It's
> not clear that it matters that much.

Really?  Which do you prefer?

The list to show by command?
% ls /sbin/fs
clri_cd9660	clri_ffs	clri_kernfs	clri_lfs
clri_mfs	clri_msdos	clri_nfs	clri_null
clri_portal	clri_procfs	clri_umap	clri_union
dump_cd9660	dump_ffs	dump_kernfs	dump_lfs
dump_mfs	dump_msdos	dump_nfs	dump_null
dump_portal	dump_procfs	dump_umap	dump_union

...


Or the list to show by fs?
% ls /sbin/fs
cd9660_clri	cd9660_dump	cd9660_fsck	cd9660_fstyp
cd9660_mount	cd9660_newfs	cd9660_restore	cd9660_umount
ffs_clri	ffs_dump	ffs_fsck	ffs_fstyp
ffs_mount	ffs_newfs	ffs_restore	ffs_umount

...


If I had my way, it'd look like:
% ls -R /sbin/fs
cd9660		ffs		kernfs		lfs
mfs		msdos		nfs		null
portal		procfs		umap		union

/sbin/fs/cd9660:
clri		dump		fsck		fstyp
mount		newfs		restore		umount

/sbin/fs/ffs:
clri		dump		fsck		fstyp
mount		newfs		restore		umount

...

If I want to add a new FS, I add /sbin/fs/$(NAME) and /lkm/$(NAME)_mod.o
and it all just works.

					Regards,
					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.