Subject: Re: phasing out mfs; make init(8) use tmpfs?
To: None <tech-kern@NetBSD.org>
From: David Young <email@example.com>
Date: 02/15/2007 18:04:41
On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 11:55:51PM +0000, Geoff Wing wrote:
> David Young <firstname.lastname@example.org> typed:
> : Is there anywhere TMPFS cannot replace MFS, and work at least as well?
> : If not, is it ok if we begin to phase MFS out?
> It doesn't have whitespace objects (so you can't do upper layer union mounts
> with it).
Do you use union mounts in this way on /dev/, today, or is this purely
hypothetical? I ask because I have never been able to rely on union
mounts for anything, although it is my understanding that reliably may
have improved with recent changes by Chuck Silvers.
> : I believe the only part of the system that depends on MFS is init(8).
> : If init(8) finds /dev/console missing, it creates /dev/ and runs MAKEDEV
> : in it. I have attached a patch that makes init(8) use TMPFS, instead.
> Only TMPFS? What if TMPFS fails?
I agree with you and Izumi Tsutsui, MFS ought to be attempted if TMPFS
> Also what about config files? No arch has it in INSTALL and only five have
> it in GENERIC.
I will have to treat that problem, too.
David Young OJC Technologies
email@example.com Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933