Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 00:41:02 -0800 From: Dima Dorfman <dima@unixfreak.org> To: Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> Cc: cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: mdconfig config file (was: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/conf GENERI C) Message-ID: <20010203084109.4E4D33E02@bazooka.unixfreak.org> In-Reply-To: Message from Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> of "Sat, 03 Feb 2001 01:39:48 CST." <14971.46532.626840.235620@guru.mired.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Dima Dorfman <dima@unixfreak.org> types: > > > 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. > > Personally, I don't like how mount_mfs is implemented now. Perhaps > > there was good reason for doing it this way, but I don't like it. It > > isn't even a separate subroutine within newfs, it is just kind of > > stuck in the middle. In fact, I think all of newfs(8) is ugly; > > anything that has a 500-line subroutine is. Then again, many may not > > agree. > > Looking at all the functionality needed, I think it was becase someone > wanted to avoid exec'ing programs, and putting it all in newfs caused > the least code duplication. Of course, if you rewrite newfs to replace I don't particularly like the idea of exec'ing programs, either. I dislike the idea of writing disklabel and newfs functionality into one program even less, however. That seems like total waste. The former seems like the lesser of two evils. > BTW, there was a request earlier that whatever we do not copy the > bogus fstab entries for mount_mfs - most notably the device name. I > thought I saw a suggestion that it needs to be /dev/md[#], where just > /dev/md would mean to use the MD_AUTOUNIT functionality; /dev/md# The mount_md I wrote (see "mount_md (was: mdconfig config file)" on -hackers) does this except for the autounit part, which should be rather trivial to do. I asked whether this was desired in the e-mail. > would mean use unit #. Since it pretty much always mounts ons c, > allowing /dev/md#c probably wouldn't hurt. If you really want > backwards compatability (why? I'll change the fstab entry), how about > having it check for mount_mfs to mean "AUTO_UNIT, ignore device" and > mount_md to use the above? I see no reason to make mount_mfs an alias to mount_md. It's one thing to make the options backwards comaptible (which they are) for those too lazy to redo everything; it's another to make mount_mfs act like mount_md for those too lazy to s/mfs/md/ in fstab. I'm not much in favor of the latter, although I wouldn't care if someone wanted to do that. Dima Dorfman dima@unixfreak.org 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?20010203084109.4E4D33E02>