On Wed, 24 Mar 2004, David Laight wrote:
> > even though I expected newfs to default to ffsv2 (which doesn't work).
> 
> Newfs defaults to ffsv1, thers is little benefit in using ffsv2 on NetBSD.

I'm confused about the bootblock changes that happened in the fall then.

I thought that the superblock changes, and newfs changes were made to
pull in work from FreeBSD, and considered that work to be for 'ffsv2'.

If that's not the case, they what should ffs be referred to as, before
and after that change?

-- 
David Maxwell, david@vex.net|david@maxwell.net -->
If you don't spend energy getting what you want,
	You'll have to spend it dealing with what you get.
					      - Unknown