On Wed, Dec 22, 2004 at 01:17:17PM +0100, Juan RP wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 09:57:33 +0100
> Peter Bex <Peter.Bex@student.kun.nl> wrote:
> 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > I just read McKusick's softdeps paper and if I understood it correctly,
> > fscks aren't necessary anymore except for the occasional background fsck
> > to reclaim lost inodes.
> > 
> 
> Background fsck hasn't been implemented on NetBSD, this could be implemented
> now we have fss(4) with read/write support... any volunteer? :-)

fss(4) really doesn't have anything to do with it.

-- 
 Thor Lancelot Simon	                                      tls@rek.tjls.com

"The inconsistency is startling, though admittedly, if consistency is to be
 abandoned or transcended, there is no problem."		- Noam Chomsky