On Wed, 22 Mar 2000, NetBSD Bob wrote:

> > Actually, I think it would be a rather decent behaviour if newfs perhaps
> > by default didn't newfs filesystems that were already 4.2BSD (preferrably
> > overridable) and didn't newfs at all a partition which overlapped any
> > other partition that was marked as 4.2BSD.
> > 
> > This could possibly be a lifesaver at times.
> 
> As long as there was a switch there or query there to force a newfs,
> if desired.  Sometimes, I really do want to blow away anything previous,
> as cleanly as I can, after botched installs, bad crashes, system burps,
> admin stupidities, changing flavors of OS, etc.  IF newfs did not, then
> that would leave a llfmt as the only recourse.

Actually no. Since you are allowed to edit the disk label...

But anyway, I also think that it should be able to override. Further I
think that newfs should ask instead of having a switch.

But that's just me.

	Johnny

Johnny Billquist                  || "I'm on a bus
                                  ||  on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt@update.uu.se           ||  Reading murder books
pdp is alive!                     ||  tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol