Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 22:49:22 -0600 (CST) From: Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> To: Dima Dorfman <dima@unixfreak.org> Cc: cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: mdconfig config file (was: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/conf GENERI C) Message-ID: <14971.36306.550056.3968@guru.mired.org> In-Reply-To: <10389756@toto.iv>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dima Dorfman <dima@unixfreak.org> types: > > := Why not write a 'mount_md' program to do all the magic based on fstab > > := options, similar to what mount_mfs used to do for MFS? A 'mount_md' > > := would give us instant integration into existing kernel mechanisms, > > := including startup (/etc/rc) mechanisms. > > : > <snip> > > > > (this whole thing is predicated on someone writing a mount_md wrapper > > for MD that mimics the options mount_mfs accepts, for compatibility). > > I'll do it. Would it be safe to assume that it's acceptable to write > a C program to parse the arguments, build command lines to > appropriately invoke disklabel, newfs, maybe tunefs, and mount, then > call system(3) to execute them? If you're going to use system on them all, why not just use Perl or a shell script and getopts? The only thing that's really painful in this process (at least now that the hard work has been done) newfs. This suggests that, instead of a new program, making newfs do duty as mount_md - similar to the way it does mount_mfs now - might be the way to do it. That leaves out the tunefs functionality, which begs the question - why doesn't newfs have (at least some of) tunefs functionality now? I, for one, would like to be able to enable soft updates on a file system when it's created. <mike -- Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?14971.36306.550056.3968>