Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 02:14:45 -0400 From: Andrew J Caines <A.J.Caines@altavista.net> To: FreeBSD Stable <stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: More panics (different hardware) Message-ID: <20001007021445.B10082@hal9000.bsdonline.org> In-Reply-To: <86610.970640332@winston.osd.bsdi.com>; from jkh@winston.osd.bsdi.com on Tue, Oct 03, 2000 at 11:18:52PM -0700 References: <A.J.Caines@altavista.net> <86610.970640332@winston.osd.bsdi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jordan and List, > Still, you've proven there's a clear bad interaction here. Thanks! You're welcome, I think. Before I go crashing my box, collecting debugging output and core dumps, I wanted to make sure this will be helpful. Please let me know. This is something which I find a bit confusing. FDESC is in LINT with all the "safe" filesytems, unlike DEVFS which has has something of a warning above it. I know that UNION has warning and that the fdesc filesystem uses a union mount but... I don't have UNION in my kernel! To clarify, fdesc(5) mentions that it requires a union mount, however LINT does not specify any UNION dependency and clearly mounting fdesc "mostly works" without even having UNION in the kernel. Just to add to the confusion, mount_std(8) considers fdesc ``standard'', defining ``standard'' to include union mounts. This is, of course, a semantic issue, not a technical one. I can't tell whether I'm missing a piece of the puzzle or if there really is a discrepancy. If it's a documentation issue, I'd be happy to offer a diff for LINT - if I understand what's going on, that is. -Andrew- -- _______________________________________________________________________ | -Andrew J. Caines- Unix Systems Engineer A.J.Caines@altavista.net | To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20001007021445.B10082>