On Mar 22, 1:10pm, dholland-t...@netbsd.org (David Holland) wrote: -- Subject: Re: libquota proposal
| On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 02:21:26PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote: | > > (also, edquota and repquota seem fs-independent to me...) | > | > no, they're not: they can directly the quota1 file specified in the | > fstab if quotactl fails or the filesystem is not mounted. | | That's a bug, or more accurately legacy behavior that doesn't need to | be supported. Once upon a time (IIRC) df used to fall back to opening | the block device and examining ffs structures directly; that was | removed because it violated desirable abstractions. Totally agree, please remove this complex and hard to maintain stuff. christos
