Subject: Re: Progress meter for fsck, revisited
To: Nathan J. Williams <email@example.com>
From: Jason Thorpe <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 01/13/2004 15:25:20
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
On Jan 13, 2004, at 3:15 PM, Nathan J. Williams wrote:
> .. and you're going to hold your breath until you turn blue, I see.
I don't think it's worth over-complicating a cute feature that you have
to choose to turn on. This is not enabled by default. If you want
cute, you have to give up something. In my particular application, I
need the cute, and the trade-off is completely acceptable. What's the
> I think this change sucks. It's cute to have the progress-bar output,
> but parallel fsck is sufficently useful for speed that it means the
> progress bar can only be used in single-filesystem configurations,
> which rules out many configurations. Why add the progress bar if it's
> so completely limited?
In the applications where I need them, there is typically only one
(very large) file system, and the start-up scripts that handle this
don't enable parallelism in any case.
Just because parallelism is disabled, doesn't mean you can't use it in
multi-filesystem configurations! I don't know where on earth you got
If NetBSD doesn't want the changes, fine. No skin off my back.
-- Jason R. Thorpe <email@example.com>
content-type: application/pgp-signature; x-mac-type=70674453;
content-description: This is a digitally signed message part
content-disposition: inline; filename=PGP.sig
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (Darwin)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----