On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 14:48, Alexander Best <arun...@freebsd.org> wrote: > On Wed Oct 27 10, Doug Barton wrote: >> What may be a better approach is to confirm the fs' that DO work, list >> them, and then add something to the effect of, "This feature is unlikely >> to work on other file systems." > > i don't think that's a good approach, because then the rm(1) has to be changed > everytime freebsd gets a new fs which works with the -P option. i think it's > better to list which fs semantics DON'T work. so if freebsd gets a new fs, > users simply have to know which semantics the new fs is based on and can > decide > for themselves whether the -P switch will work or not. > > so far the -P option doesn't seem to work for: > > - COW fs and/or > - fs with a variable block size and/or > - fs which do journaling
I really don't want to ask the average user to know whether their filesystem is in-place block-rewriting or not. That's just silly. In this case Doug is right; I don't think FreeBSD gets new file systems as often as you think that it would be a big burden. Having a general description of the types of filesystem it can work on might be useful, but a list seems more useful still. Listing the types it can't work on is backwards because that requires a user to understand the dichotomy as well as knowing what kind of filesystem they don't have / do have. And for them to never get it backwards. At least mount(8) will tell you what filesystem you are using; there's no tool to tell you the properties of your filesystem, and good luck easily-mining an answer to the question of whether your filesystem fits into that category from a manpage without introducing substantial confusion. Maybe there should be substantial confusion around this feature, though, since that's what it seems to be there for. Juli. _______________________________________________ svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
