On Jan 14, 2024, at 08:39, Olivier Certner <o...@freebsd.org> wrote: > Hi Mark, > >> I never use atime, always noatime, for UFS. That said, I'd never propose >> changing the long standing defaults for commands and calls. > > With this mail, you're giving more detailed objections on the > social/political aspects of the proposed changed, or as we usually say more > simply, POLA. > > All your points are already largely weakened by the fact that, to wrap-up in > a single sentence at the risk of being slightly caricatural (but then see my > other mails), nobody really seems to care seriously about access times.
I seriously care about having a lack of access times. Yet, I've no objection to needing to be explicit about it in commands and subroutine interfaces, given the long standing interfaces (defaults). It would be different if I could not achieve the lack of access times. That defaults do not block having the desired settings makes the change optional, not technically required. The defaults are, thus, primarily social/political aspects of interfaces, not technical requirements to make things work. Given that, I explicitly claim that avoiding POLA at this late stage is my preference for the priority of competing considerations. I make no claim of knowing the majority view of the tradeoffs. I would claim that, if the majority is not by just some marginal amount, contradicting that majority view for this would not be appropriate. (Again: the social/political aspects.) And, hopefully, this is my last contribution to this particular bike shed. === Mark Millard marklmi at yahoo.com
