> > (Side note: I find it amusing that that GNU/LINUX OS _forces_ a fsck if
> > it's been ``too long'' since one was last done.  Apparently, the people
> > developing that GNU/LINUX don't have much confidence in their filesystem
> > support...(^&  That, or they have unclean shutdowns, universally, on a
> > frequent enough basis that no one runs cleanly long enough to encounter
> > the spurious fsck.)
>
> Or, they like to be relatively sure that the disk and file system in
> intact.

Hm.  Isn't run_fsk in daily.conf for those who are concerned about cosmic
rays eating their disks?  Or do you need something that runs more often
than once every 24 hours?  (Surely, if you're concerned about this, your
machines are up enough consecutive hours to expect to run /etc/daily.)  Or
perhaps I misunderstand the meaning of that /etc/daily.conf variable?

Maybe I'm just an accident waiting to happen, but I've only had a few,
rare fsck's on my systems.  Granted, I've only got a couple of computers
under my control...and the total number of bits involved is pretty low.
Still...  I only want an fsck when I have an unclean shutdown.  About 2 of
these a year seems plenty.  (^&


> 	http://www.NetBSD.org/cgi-bin/query-pr-single.pl?number=1209
>
> It's a bug that we don't have any mechanism that allows users to
> select this.
>
> (Actually, now i'm puzzled: there was recently some discussion about
> this, after the PR was put into 'feedback' state...  Not quite sure
> why it didn't get tacked on to the PR.)

I couldn't find any discussion of this in netbsd-bugs (or, I think,
current-users) around either the date of the original post or the date
when it was pushed to ``feedback''.  Did the thread not mention the PR
number?  Or did I just not look on the proper mailing list(s)?


  ``I probably don't know what I'm talking about.'' --rauch@math.rice.edu