From owner-cvs-all Sat Jan 27 18:13:35 2001 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mass.dis.org (mass.dis.org [216.240.45.41]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76DC637B400; Sat, 27 Jan 2001 18:13:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from mass.dis.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mass.dis.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0S2DDi00916; Sat, 27 Jan 2001 18:13:13 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from msmith@mass.dis.org) Message-Id: <200101280213.f0S2DDi00916@mass.dis.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.1.1 10/15/1999 To: mjacob@feral.com Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/conf GENERIC In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 27 Jan 2001 18:02:38 PST." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 18:13:13 -0800 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > I'll have to re-examine this. What I want and what people can/should use MFS > or md for is like solaris tmpfs. Even with softupdates it's preferrable to > have a volatile filesystem. I would think a VFS would be better at doing this > than a 'device driver', but I really don't care. I think you're right, and I understand now what you're getting at. > If MFS is really currently broken by DEVFS and md really does replace it, then > it should be nuked from GENERIC. MFS' should be fixed, even if just back to its previous "mostly broken" state, IMO. Most of my objections to it have simply been that it never worked "right" in the first place. -- ... every activity meets with opposition, everyone who acts has his rivals and unfortunately opponents also. But not because people want to be opponents, rather because the tasks and relationships force people to take different points of view. [Dr. Fritz Todt] V I C T O R Y N O T V E N G E A N C E To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message