Subject: Re: "tfs" and other filesystems with very short names
To: None <email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Ross Harvey <email@example.com>
Date: 09/22/1998 13:23:25
> From: "Perry E. Metzger" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Jason Thorpe writes:
> > On Tue, 22 Sep 1998 08:49:18 +0000 (GMT)
> > Alan Barrett <email@example.com> wrote:
> > > Is it a good idea to add new filesystems with such short names? We just
> > > went through a process of renameing "cfs" to "coda" because of a name
> > > clash. I'd prefer to see see "tfs" renamed to "ustarfs" now, rather than
> > > wait for another name clash later.
> > This is "libsa", not the kernel. "tfs" is only in the boot blocks.
> For now, yes, but maybe not always. Also, it is nice to keep a 1<->1
> correspondence between kernel fs names and libsa names, and we may
> have a tfs some day.
I don't mind changing the name, but do note that in the quiet backwater of
libsa, ffs is still called `ufs'.