I was thinking of doing that too. The problem is that we don't have a standard way to pass feedback to the user why the mount fail, and returning EINVAL seems suboptimal. It also changes the current semantics.
christos > On Aug 19, 2019, at 6:35 PM, Robert Elz <k...@munnari.oz.au> wrote: > > Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 05:32:42 -0400 > From: "Christos Zoulas" <chris...@netbsd.org> > Message-ID: <20190819093242.88152f...@cvs.netbsd.org> > > | Log Message: > | If we could not start extattr for some reason, don't advertise extattr > | in the mount. > > I would have expected a better result would be that if an attempt is > made to mount with extattr turned on, and extattr is not available, then > the mount would fail, rather than succeeding with exattr missing. > > kre
