Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 15 Aug 2013 16:18:06 -0500
From:      Eric van Gyzen <eric@vangyzen.net>
To:        Glen Barber <gjb@FreeBSD.org>, stable@freebsd.org
Cc:        Simon Gerraty <sjg@FreeBSD.org>
Subject:   Re: makefs Sparse Files: NetBSD CLI Compatibility
Message-ID:  <520D458E.4070801@vangyzen.net>
In-Reply-To: <520B9EA5.5010107@vangyzen.net>
References:  <520B81D1.1010500@vangyzen.net> <20130814140653.GG2241@glenbarber.us> <520B951D.2080305@vangyzen.net> <20130814145345.GI2241@glenbarber.us> <520B9EA5.5010107@vangyzen.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 08/14/2013 10:13, Eric van Gyzen wrote:
> On 08/14/2013 09:53, Glen Barber wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 09:33:01AM -0500, Eric van Gyzen wrote:
>>> On 08/14/2013 09:06, Glen Barber wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 08:10:41AM -0500, Eric van Gyzen wrote:
>>>>> NetBSD's makefs has a -Z flag to create the image as a sparse file.  In
>>>>> FreeBSD, the flag is spelled -p.  Is there a reason for using a
>>>>> different flag?  It would be very nice to preserve CLI compatibility
>>>>> with NetBSD.
>>>>>
>>>>> NetBSD committed first (by one month), and neither change has gone into
>>>>> a release yet, so we should change to match NetBSD.  We should do it
>>>>> soon, too, since our change will go into 9.2-RELEASE.
>>>>>
>>>>> If we agree, I'll gladly make the patches, trivial though they'll be.
>>>>>
>>>> Can you please try the attached patch?
>>> Thanks, Glen.  That patch would work.  However, since our -p flag has
>>> not yet gone into a release, there is no need to keep it.  I suggest
>>> that we simply rename -p to -Z, to match NetBSD.  The attached patch
>>> does this.
>>>
>> Not in a release, no, but it is available in stable/ branches.  I'd
>> prefer to deprecate the '-p' but keep the option for now, as we have no
>> way to know how many people are using it.
> That's reasonable.  The attached patch, for releng/9.2, does this.  We
> could remove -p in head (by using my previous patch).

Is there any chance this will be fixed in 9.2?  It would be nice to
avoid introducing incompatibility in a release.

Eric



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?520D458E.4070801>