On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 04:31:34AM +0000, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote: | have you tried to convince freebsd guys to use your preferred name? | being different creates another layer of confusion. As I explained in my original thread about this issue [1], it is the inconsistency in use of "ffs" versus "ufs" without own own software and documentation that is confusing to end users, not our difference in naming with other UNIX distributions. For that matter, FreeBSD is not a paragon of consistency here -- the tools have "ffs" in the name, and the manual page on FreeBSD describing the file system is ffs(7) (not ufs(7)) -- so using it It is not an issue of `confusing kernel hackers who know it as UFS' or confusing `confusing people who use both NetBSD and FreeBSD', it is an issue of confusing our end users. What we had before was confusing, especially when it led to people resulting in unbootable systems because the documentation was unclear. I have no objection to Izumi Tsutsui's recent suggestion of updating the documentation to indicate that UFS is another name for FFS in our system. E.g, "FFSv2 (UFS2)". [1] http://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-userlevel/2009/03/31/msg002003.html
Attachment:
pgp6m_8K4ZqRi.pgp
Description: PGP signature