[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: libquota proposal
On Mar 22, 1:10pm, dholland-tech%netbsd.org@localhost (David Holland) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: libquota proposal
| On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 02:21:26PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
| > > (also, edquota and repquota seem fs-independent to me...)
| > no, they're not: they can directly the quota1 file specified in the
| > fstab if quotactl fails or the filesystem is not mounted.
| That's a bug, or more accurately legacy behavior that doesn't need to
| be supported. Once upon a time (IIRC) df used to fall back to opening
| the block device and examining ffs structures directly; that was
| removed because it violated desirable abstractions.
Totally agree, please remove this complex and hard to maintain stuff.
Main Index |
Thread Index |