Subject: Re: kern/6434: compress/nocompress bit for tapes
To: Todd Vierling <email@example.com>
From: Perry E. Metzger <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 11/13/1998 20:50:29
Todd Vierling writes:
> On Fri, 13 Nov 1998, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
> : > What's wrong with "mt compress 1"/"mt compress 0"?
> : Why do we need rewinding devices when we have mt rew?
> Good point, but the semantics are a little bit different. You can "mt rew"
> a rewinding device with well defined behavior.
> What "mt compress 0/1" does on the compress/nocompress device is a little
> more vague; should it keep state on a device declared with a given
> compression state?
Either way is fine so long as it is documented.