Subject: Re: phasing out mfs; make init(8) use tmpfs?
To: Bill Studenmund <email@example.com>
From: Steven M. Bellovin <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 02/18/2007 17:15:32
On Sun, 18 Feb 2007 14:12:28 -0800
Bill Studenmund <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 16, 2007 at 01:56:58PM -0600, Eric Haszlakiewicz wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 17, 2007 at 03:39:29AM +0900, Izumi Tsutsui wrote:
> > > firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> > >
> > > What's the problem on trying both?
> > It makes init bigger. (only a little)
> > It puts a stumbling block in the way of phasing out mfs entirely.
> > Keeping it as a compatibility feature is fine, but if we're really
> > getting rid of mfs we should define a timeframe for when stuff like
> > this goes away. e.g. "init will stop supporting mount_mfs in
> > NetBSD 5"
> I'd say put the fail-back in for a while with an after-the-fact log
> message (so the log message actually goes somewhere since we made
> After a while (a major release in the release stream and a few months
> in -current), take the failover code out.
That sounds right.
--Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb