Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 00:31:44 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org> To: Xin LI <delphij@FreeBSD.org> Cc: svn-src-stable@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-stable-7@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r187069 - stable/7/sbin/fsck_ffs Message-ID: <20090112083144.GA69408@dragon.NUXI.org> In-Reply-To: <200901120039.n0C0dMKX043214@svn.freebsd.org> References: <200901120039.n0C0dMKX043214@svn.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 12:39:22AM +0000, Xin LI wrote: > Author: delphij > Date: Mon Jan 12 00:39:22 2009 > New Revision: 187069 > URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/187069 > > Log: > MFC revisions 178088 and 179656: Catastrophic recovery mode. Hi Xin, I guess you missed my email to you about this. I was hoping to get an answer to this before it was MFC'ed. The use of 'C' conflicts with a Juniper Networks change Juniper wants to push back to FreeBSD. For Juniper the -C flag is the "clean" flag. Meaning don't do anything if the FS is clean, other wise do as full a fsck as possible (vs. just a "preen" fsck). It is useful as 'fsck -C -y /var' (for instance). Do you think your functionality could live under the "-D" (damaged) option? fsck_ffs already had a "-c" option, or Juniper would have used that letter. -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org) Q: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. A: Why is top-posting (putting a reply at the top of the message) frowned upon? Let's not play "Jeopardy-style quoting"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090112083144.GA69408>