From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Mar 24 15:38:01 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA19843 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 24 Mar 1997 15:38:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from plum.cyber.com.au (plum.cyber.com.au [203.7.155.24]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id PAA19838 for ; Mon, 24 Mar 1997 15:37:57 -0800 (PST) Received: (from darrenr@localhost) by plum.cyber.com.au (8.6.12/8.6.6) id KAA01685; Tue, 25 Mar 1997 10:36:25 +1100 From: Darren Reed Message-Id: <199703242336.KAA01685@plum.cyber.com.au> Subject: Re: dump for MS-DOS partitions. To: christos@nyc.deshaw.com (Christos Zoulas) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 10:36:24 +1100 (EST) Cc: port-i386@NetBSD.ORG, hackers@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: from "Christos Zoulas" at Mar 24, 97 10:49:56 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk In some mail I received from Christos Zoulas, sie wrote > > In article <19970324214916.YH08116@uriah.heep.sax.de> joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch) writes: > >Better name it `dosdump'? Remember, there's more DOSes than just M$. > >Also, we do already have a mkdosfs(8), maybe somebody would even write > >a dosfsck(8). (mkdosfs doesn't understand harddisks however. I'm not > >the right person to ask for this, my DOS knowledge is too weak.) > > > >Ideally, all this should probably named s/dos/fat/g. It's a more > >descriptive name of this filesystem. > > We do have fsck_msdos, and we are using your mkdosfs as newfs_msdos... > The dump should become dump_msdos... > It would be nice if we shared the same naming conventions. hmmm... dumplfs, newlfs, dump, newfs... ...newlfs doesn't really fit in but the convention of using prog_fstype seems to have merit (if dumplfs & newlfs are renamed too). but, with VFAT, FAT12, FAT16 and now maybe FAT32, is "_msdos" descriptive enough ? Darren