On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 11:11:12 -0600
Eric Haszlakiewicz <erh@swapsimple.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 06:04:41PM -0600, David Young wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 11:55:51PM +0000, Geoff Wing wrote:
> > > Only TMPFS?  What if TMPFS fails?
> > 
> > I agree with you and Izumi Tsutsui, MFS ought to be attempted if
> > TMPFS fails.
> 
> Three questions:
> How does this work toward the stated goal of phasing out mfs?
> Why would tmpfs fail?
> If tmpfs fails, why wouldn't mfs fail?
> 
Because it's not in the kernel?  Init should be able to deal with
that, I think. 



		--Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb